P, Boccotti
ELSEVIER SCIENCE B.V. Sara Burgerhartstraat 25 P.O. Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record from the Library of Congress has been applied for.
ISBN: 0 444 50380 3 The paper used in this publication meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.481992 (Permanence of Paper). Printed in The Netherlands.
To my parents
VII
PREFACE
The book aims to cover in a unitary way both the deterministic and statistical topics of the mechanics of sea waves. Furthermore, it aims to highlight some recent progress on the dynamics of random windgenerated waves and on longterm wave statistics. Finally, it aims to give a fresh approach to traditional concepts. In this regard, some original proofs are given (see the conclusive notes of each chapter), new evidence from small scale field experiments is used to introduce crucial topics like wave forces, and some widely worked examples are given (e.g. an example of 17 pages for the calculation of the largest wave loads on a submerged tunnel during its lifetime). The text is intended for researchers and graduate students, but the style is such that most of the book is suitable for undergraduate students. This is because the various formulae are proved from the fundamental equations, and the harder concepts are explained with both examples and sometimes also with short stories. Strictly speaking, it is assumed that the reader has knowledge of calculus and basic mechanics (e.g. volumes 1 and 2 of Calculus by T.M. Apostol, and Physics I by R. Resnick, D. Halliday, and K.S. Krane). The fundamentals of strength of materials are needed for a part of chapter 12. Chapters 1 and 2 cover the dynamics of the periodic waves. Chapter I starts from the differential equations of motion to obtain the velocity potential. Chapter 2 applies the linear momentum equation and the energy equation to control volumes with surface waves. As a consequence, in chapter I you will find solutions for the velocity potential of progressive waves (with and without a current), and of waves interacting with vertical walls. While, in chapter 2 you will find the solutions to problems like those of shoaling, refraction, setdown, and group celerity. Chapter 3 covers the beach processes. How large is the runup? How is the planform evolution of a nourishment project? How is the deformation of a beach after the construction of a detached breakwater or a groin? These problems are dealt with analytically. The starting point is the formal solution for the beach planform evolution under the assumption of small curvature of the contour lines. Chapters 4 and 5 cover the shortterm wave statistics. Chapter 4 introduces the basic concepts (sea state, autocovariance of the surface displacement, frequency
VIII
Preface
spectrum, and so on). It also explains how to obtain the autocovariance and the frequency spectrum from the time series data, and how to infer the nature of a sea state from these functions. Chapter 5 gives formal solutions and experimental evidence for the statistics of wave height and wave period in a sea state. Chapters 6 and 7 cover the longterm wave statistics. Chapter 6 explains how to obtain the probability of exceedance of the significant wave height at a given location. Then, it introduces the concept of triangular equivalent storm: for each actual sea storm, a triangular storm exists with the same probability that the largest wave height exceeds any fixed threshold. Chapter 7 applies this concept to give the formal solutions for return periods of sea storms with some given characteristics. This chapter also discusses in depth the relationship between the return period, the lifetime, and the probability of occurrence. Chapters 8, 9, and 10 cover the dynamics of the random windgenerated waves. Chapter 8 gives the velocity potential of a sea state to the first approximation in a Stokes' expansion. Also, the cases of wind waves interacting with vertical walls are dealt with in detail. This chapter points out some very big differences between windgenerated waves and periodic waves, in what concerns reflection and diffraction. Then, chapter 9 develops the recent theory of quasideterminism of the highest waves in a sea state: if a wave with a given height H occurs at a fixed point Xo, and H is very large with respect to the mean wave height at this point, we can expect the water surface and velocity potential near Xo to be very close to some well precise deterministic forms. Chapter 10 deals with the more exciting topic. The highest waves in a random sea state belong to quasideterministic (threedimensional) wave groups. The wave group is like a family and each individual wave is a member of this family, with a life cycle. The characteristics of these wave groups are deeply investigated in view of the applications (wave loads on structures). And, through this investigation, we arrive at a new insight into random windgenerated waves: these waves are higher on the time domain than on the space domain and they possess a sort of genetic code. Chapters 11 and 12 cover the wave loads on offshore structures. Chapter 11 firstly deals with the socalled large bodies on which waves exert only the inertia force. Then it considers the small bodies on which waves also exert a significant drag force. The problem of a long structure (what is the maximum expected wave height on a long structure like a floating tunnel?) completes this chapter. Then chapter 12 is entirely devoted to worked examples of wave force estimates. Chapter 13 covers the wave loads on coastal structures: first, wave forces on vertical breakwaters; then, stability of the rubble mound breakwaters under the action of sea states of given characteristics. Chapter 14 deals with topics which call for an overall overview of offshore and coastal engineering. The first topic is comparison between the effects of tsunamis and of wind waves, from the open sea to the coast. The second topic is small scale models, and the third topic is wave measurements for the various needs. These subjects, which I approached in an organic way for the first time in my Italian book Idraulica Marittima (UTET, 1997), serve as three courses to graduate students
Preface
IX
in civil engineering or ocean engineering, courses that my assistants and I give in the University of Reggio Calabria. (wave theory and coastal structures) a.1) dynamics of the periodic waves: chapters 1 and 2, except sects. 2.5.4 and 2.6.3 (setdown); a.2) shortterm wave statistics: chapters 4 and 5; a.3) longterm wave statistics: chapter 6 except sect. 6.3 (directional wave prediction), chapter 7 till sect. 7.5 (design sea state for coastal structures), and Appendix A; a.4) stability of coastal structures: chapter 13; a.5) small scale models and wave measurements: sects. 14.2.1, 14.2.2 and 14.3.
First course S e c o n d c o u r s e (advanced wave theory and offshore structures) b.1) design wave for offshore structures: from sect. 7.6 to sect. 7.8; b.2) dynamics of the random windgenerated waves: chapters 8, 9, and 10, except the formal proof from sect. 9.6 to sect. 9.10; b.3) wave loads on offshore structures: chapters 11 and 12; b.4) discussion on the small scale models: from sect. 14.2.3 to sect. 14.2.5. T h i r d c o u r s e (beach processes) c.1) variation of the mean water level from offshore to coast: sects. 2.5.4 and 2.6.3; c.2) wave actions on coasts: chapter 3; c.3) prediction of the wave height for given wave direction: sects. 6.3 and 7.9; c.4) comparison between effects of tsunamis and effects of wind waves: sect. 14.1. The first course is introductory to the others, so that a student can attend only course a), or a) and b), or a) and c), or a), b), and c). The sections from 9.6 to 9.10 and Appendix B go beyond the three courses and are intended for researchers only. It is also advisable to limit a few of the more analytical parts. Specifically, for sect. 2.10 (shoaling and setdown of waves on current) one could give the introduction (sect. 2.10.1) and conclusion (sect. 2.10.9). Of course there is also the possibility to cut off a few parts, so as to shorten the courses, if necessary. In particular, course a) could omit the wavecurrent interaction (sects. 1.9 and 2.10), and/ or the way to obtain the continuous spectrum (from sect. 4.4.3 to sect. 4.4.6). Finally, there are a few introductory sections which have been given for the sake of completeness, and which can be omitted if the relevant subjects are treated in other courses. These are: sects. 1.12 and 2.12 which give the concepts of fluid mechanics needed to develop the wave theory, and sects. 5.12 which introduce the random Gaussian processes. Paolo Boccotti Reggio Calabria, Italy May 1999
XI
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very grateful to professors Enrico Marchi and Giulio Scarsi who, nearly twentyfive years ago, introduced me to research on sea waves. Then ! wish to express my gratitude to assistant professors Felice Arena, Giuseppe Barbaro, Pasquale Filianoti, and to engineer Francis Cirianni for their reading of the manuscript and some useful comments. F. Arena also deserves an acknowledgement for his help with the analysis of NDBC buoy data and satellite data. The graphics are due to engineer Vincenzo Fiamma who drew the figures from my file data and my sketches. They all were my students, and I am proud of each of them. Finally, I very gratefully acknowledge the great courtesy and fruitful cooperation of UTET of Turin publisher of my Italian book Idraulica Marittima (1997) which was the basis of this new book. Part of this work was done with the financial support of the Italian National Group for Prevention from Hydrogeological Disasters (under contract CNRGNDCI No 98.00586). P.B.
XII
XIII
NOTATION
S o m e symbols used in only one section are not included in the following list.
a a
a  ( a x , ay, az) A
wave amplitude triangle height particle acceleration area width threshold of the surface displacement duration of the equivalent triangular storm threshold or special value of the wave crest elevation berm height
c~
CFR
propagation speed diffraction coefficient Fresnel integral with integrand cosine drag coefficient, inertia coefficient safety factors wave crest elevation still water depth diameter directional spreading function mean persistence duration of a storm or of the design sea state potential + kinetic energy per unit mass eccentricity frequency spectrum mean wave energy per unit surface nondimensional frequency spectrum expected number per unit time general function force per unit length general function horizontal force per unit extension of upright breakwater horizontal force, vertical force force distribution function of the frequency spectrum speed drop factor acceleration of gravity longshore diffusivity general function
E Zf EX
f  (fx,L,f~) F F
.S
, J///
G G
XIV
Notation
h H
/4,
g
threshold or special value of the significant wave height wave height significant wave height unit vectors Irribarren number wave number nondimensional wave number KeuleganCarpenter number length of a structure wavelength lifetime of a structure mass jth order moment of the frequency spectrum variance of the surface displacement of a sea state moment of a force or of a force per unit length determinant of a covariance matrix parameter of the spreading direction function number being specified every time unit normal vector to a surface pressure probability density function probability of exceedance weight weight in still water probability flow rate per unit length polar coordinate (the rcurves are straight lines through the origin) radius return period Reynolds number reactions of the foundation runup radiation stress tensor local propagation axis directional wave spectrum velocity head total uplift pressure per unit length of breakwater setdown, setup Fresnel integral with integrand sine nondimensional directional spectrum
ix, iy, iz
k
K~
1
L L
m my mo
M M
l'l n,N,~4
n  ( n x , ny, n z )
P P P P p*
Q
r
S S S SD, Su
SFR
Notation
XV
t to
T T T*
T,
time special time instant wave period time lag abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance function interarrival time of a random point process very large time interval greatest lag used for obtaining the spectrum from the autocovariance dummy variable current velocity, wind speed parameter of the probability of H, particle displacement particle velocity random variable dummy variable nondimensional frequency parameter of the probability of H, parameters of the probability of H, for a given wave direction volume dummy variable horizontal coordinate axis fixed point of the horizontal plane ancillary variable related to H, vector whose initial point is Xo horizontal coordinate axis component of vector X ancillary variable related to the probability of exceedance of H, fetch vertical coordinate axis with the origin at the mean water level angle between xaxis and direction of wave advance quotient between wave height and r.m.s, surface displacement of a sea state quotient between wave height and Hs Phillips's parameter polar coordinate (the flcurves are circles centred at the origin) quotient between wave crest elevation and r.m.s, surface displacement of a sea state specific weight
H H
u(G,u,,uz) ~ (~,~,~)
V
w W W
w~, w~ W
X X
X o  (Xo, yo)
X
X  (X, Y)
Y Y Y
OL OL
A Ap
delta function variation of the mean water level due to the wave motion actual pressure +pgz
Notation
vertical coordinate axis with the origin at the seabed surface displacement fluctuating pressure head at points which remain always beneath the water surface angle between the yaxis and the direction of wave advance azimuth of the direction of wave advance angle between the yaxis and the dominant direction of the spectrum slope angle scale factor coefficient of friction kinematic viscosity
( 1 0 . 6 m 2 s 1
T]ph
in calculations)
distance offshore ratio between wave crest elevation and wave height water density (1030 kg/m 3 in calculations) r.m.s, surface displacement of a sea state time lag between crest and trough threshold of interarrival time q~ ~b = (e~, e,) velocity potential covariance of the surface displacement and the velocity potential norm of q~ mean energy flux shape parameters of the JONSWAP spectrum autocovariance function narrow bandedness parameter covariance of surface displacements angular frequency
~u
XVII
SUBSCRIPTS
0
a
A b B
C
C cl
CF
d
e
F FR G h
deep water 1 water (aqua) triangle height breaking triangle base current centre closure crest diffraction entering s e a b e d (fundus) Fourier Fresnel group high waves
in rn
mo n o Obl
p ph pr R
S SO
st
S.W. V W
inertia abscissa m a x i m u m / m i n i m u m model nourished beach, natural, nominal horizontal 2 outgoing peak 3 pressure head prototype reaction solid 4 soil still w a t e r same wave vertical wave
1 Exceptions: m0 stands for zeroth order moment of the frequency spectrum; in sects. 9.610 and in Appendix B, r/0, ~b0 stand for r/(0), ~ (0). 2 Exception: xo, Yo, to where the subscript o denotes a special value of x, y or t. 3 Exception: hp in sect. 7.10 where p denotes a given probability. 4 Exceptions: Hs where s stands for "significant"; v, in chap. 2 where s denotes the local propagation axis.
SYMBOLS
< f (t) > V f = = =
!
temporal mean m e a n v a l u e of the r a n d o m v a r i a b l e V derivative first o r d e r in the S t o k e s e x p a n s i o n , or o t h e r m e a n i n g s b e i n g specified e v e r y time; the a p e x is also u s e d to distinguish b e t w e e n the d u m m y v a r i a b l e and the i n d e p e n d e n t v a r i a b l e of an indefinite i n t e g r a l
f l!
= =
s e c o n d o r d e r in the S t o k e s e x p a n s i o n q u a n t i t y r e l e v a n t to the e q u i v a l e n t w a t e r v o l u m e
XVIII
ABBREVIATIONS e.t.s. 1.h.s. MWL p.d.f. RC 1990, RC 1991, RC 1992, RC 1993, RC 1994
r.m.s.
equivalent triangular storm lefthand side mean water level probability density function experiments in the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria root mean square righthand side
r.h.s.
XIX
L I S T OF C O N T E N T S
~~
Chapter 1
1.1 1.2 3.3 1.4 1 .S 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.1 1 1.12
The irrotational flow, the continuity equation, the Bernoulli equation The differential equations of an irrotational flow with a free surface Introduction to wave mechanics Stokes theory to the first order Analysis of the linear dispersion rule The flow field Stokes theory to the second order Nonlinearity effects Wavecurrent interaction. Part I: velocity potential and wavelength Preliminary remarks on three dimensional waves Wave reflection Wave diffraction Conclusive note References
Chapter 2
XX
List of contents
References
List of contents 175 177 180 181 5.9 Characteristic wave heights 5.10 The maximum expected wave height in a sea state of given duration
XXI
Chapter 6
Chapter 7
207 211 213 221 223 226 228 235 239 242 246 247 7.1
Chapter 8
XXII 254 257 263 267 270 274 276 279 279 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 8.7 8.8 8.9
List of contents The directional spectrum Shoaling and refraction of the windgenerated waves Reflection of the windgenerated waves Diffraction of the windgenerated waves Longcrested random waves: the link between periodic waves and windgenerated waves Direct proportion between the maximum expected wave height and the diffraction coefficient Spacetime covariances Conclusive note
References
Chapter 9
Chapter 10
311 317 318 320 324 326 335 339 346 350 359 359 10.1 10.2 10.3 10.4 10.5 10.6 10.7
References
List of contents
XXIII
Chapter 13
419 427 430 436 438 441 445 445 13.1 13.2 13.3 13.4 13.5 13.6
engineering
14.1 A comparison b e t w e e n tsunami and wind waves from the open sea to the coast 14.2 Small scale models 14.3 Wave m e a s u r e m e n t s
XXIV
List of contents
Appendix A Appendix to chapters 6 and 7: use of wave hindcast and wave measurements from satellites
463 464 470 473 A.1 A.2 A.3 Long term wave statistics from satellite data Wave hindcast Trend in the wave climate and its effects on engineering
References
Appendix B
Appendix to chapters 9 and 10: the wave group of the maximum expected crest elevation, and the wave group of the maximum expected
cresttotrough height
B.1 B.2 B.3
The first version of the quasideterminism theory Corollaries of the first version The relationship between the two versions of the theory
1.1 The irrotational flow, the continuity equation, the Bernoulli equation
The condition
Ov~ _ O, Oy
Ovy = O,
oz
(1.1)
w h e r e re, v~ are the velocity c o m p o n e n t s , is n e c e s s a r y and sufficient for a twodimensional yz m o t i o n of a rigid b o d y to be irrotational. Such a condition is only sufficient for a t w o  d i m e n s i o n a l yz w a t e r flow. I n d e e d a given w a t e r mass does not have a form, and h e n c e it can u n d e r g o such a d e f o r m a t i o n that condition (1.1) is not satisfied and the flow is still irrotational [see fig. 1.1]. T h e n e c e s s a r y and sufficient condition for a t w o  d i m e n s i o n a l yz m o t i o n of a small v o l u m e of w a t e r dx dy dz not to be r o t a t i o n a l is
Ov~ Ov~ = . Oy Oz
(1.2)
85
i
I 1
dz
Fig. 1.1
Chapter 1
Such a condition guarantees that a clockwise rotation 6c~ of face dx dz is balanced by an equal anticlockwise rotation 8c~ of face dx dy (or vice versa an anticlockwise rotation of dx dz is balanced by an equal clockwise rotation of dx dy). We shall see that wave motions are generally assumed to be irrotational, and that in a very common case the orbits of the particles are circular. Obviously the two facts (irrotational motion and circular orbit) do not contradict each other. To understand this point we can think of the Ferris wheel in an amusement park. The head of the man in fig. 1.2 moves along a circular trajectory of radius R, and his feet also move along a circular trajectory of radius R. Nevertheless the man does not rotate, and indeed his head always remains above his feet. The orbits of the various particles forming the man are circular, but the man does not rotate simply because those orbits have different centres. We shall see that the motion of water particles in a wave is similar to the motion of the man's particles on the wheel.
Fig. 1.2 The head and feet of the man on the Ferris wheel move along circular trajectories with the same radius and different centres. If condition (1.2) is satisfied, that is to say, if the motion is irrotational, a function 05(y, z, t) does exist, for which:
0q5
0q5
(1.3)
With this function, namely "velocity potential", the continuity equation takes the form 024 = 0, 02(~ t (1.4)
Oy2
Oz2
(1.5)
where f(t) is an arbitrary function of time. The Bernoulli equation says: the 1.h.s. of (1.5) can vary with time, but at any fixed time it does not vary from one point to another. Let us briefly recall the reasoning leading to the continuity equation and Bernoulli equation. Having to deal with a yz flow the abstraction of twodimensional space is convenient, and hence we shall resort to a small "volume" dy dz in order to prove equations (1.4) and (1.5). Naturally, if one prefers the more concrete threedimensional approach, one can resort to a small volume dx dy dz. In that case, all terms in the following equations must be multiplied by dx, which does not modify the final result. To prove the continuity equation we shall write that the water mass entering the small volume dy dz in the small time interval dt is equal to the water mass going out of the same volume in the same time interval. The result is
(vy
OVy dy ) dz dt + p (v~
Oy 2
Ov~dz ) dy dt Oz 2
p
4 ~yy
dzdt+p
t Ozz dz dydt,
(1.6)
where the 1.h.s. gives the entering mass and the r.h.s, gives the outgoing mass [see fig. 1.3a]. Equation (1.4) proceeds straightforwardly from (1.6) on cancelling a few terms and using definition (1.3).
Ov z dz IV z t ~ ~
Oz 2
apdz p+ ~~
Oz 2
Vy
Oy
i! dy _ 1
(a)
.y,z
Vy + ~ ~
oy2
po, 2 [ 1
op [ I
Oz2
p + ~@dy ~ ay 2
Ovz dz Oz 2
(b)
apdz
Fig. 1.3 (a) Reference scheme for the continuity equation. (b) Reference scheme for the Bernoulli equation.
Chapter 1
As to the Bernoulli equation, it proceeds on applying Newton's second law to any small volume dy dz under ideal flow assumptions, that is under the assumption that the shear stress is negligible [see fig. 1.3b]. The result is
(1.7a)
(1.7b)
Acceleration a of the particle being at point y, z (the centre of the small volume) at time t is given by Vp(t + dt)  Vp(t) adt where vp denotes the velocity of the specific particle (called P) which at time t is at point y, z. Therefore vp(t) coincides with the velocity v at point y, z at time t; while vv(t + dt) is the velocity at time t + dt at the point being occupied by particle P. Since at time t + d t particle P is at point
y + vydt, z + vzdt,
we have ve(t + dt) and hence
Ov Ov  v (y + Vydt, z + Vz dt, t + dt)  v + ~y v, dt + ~z Vz dt + Ov ~ dt,
Ov
Ov
Ov
(1.8)
oy p + 2 P \ oy /
0
Oz P + Pgz +2P\ oy J
from which follows that the sum
(04~2+1
+1
P + Pgz +2 P \ oy )
(04)~2+1
(O0~2+p__ 2 P\ Oz ) Ot
does not vary if we move along y for a fixed z and t, nor if we move along z for a fixed y and t; which can be expressed in the form (1.5).
Before concluding this introductory section, we need to explain the reason for the unusual y  z reference frame in place of the more common x  z . The reason is that, throughout the book, y will be the direction of wave propagation (at least whenever this direction is constant), and clearly if the wave travels along the yaxis, the flow is twodimensional y  z .
Let us assume that the twodimensional irrotational flow has a free surface, and let us call ~(y, t) the vertical displacement of this free surface. Our first goal is to put in mathematical form what we have just said, namely "~(y, t) is the surface displacement". In order to express in mathematical form that ~(y, t) is the vertical elevation of the airwater boundary, we shall resort to the small control volume of fig. 1.4. Specifically we shall say that the water mass entering this volume in a small time interval dt is equal to the sum of the water mass leaving the volume and of the water mass piling up in the volume in the same interval dt. Doing so, we shall implicitly specify the physical meaning of ~/(y, t). The water mass entering the small volume in a small time interval dt is m~ 
"
0~
~Y
dz dt
"
d
The water mass going out of the small volume is too. p + d dzdt with d r /  Or/dy.
Oy
~,
Oy2
(1.9)
f ~
~ly ~
Fig. 1.4 The small volume used for obtaining equation (1.13).
Chapter 1
Amp(~dOdy.
In these equations, ~7 and 0q5 are, respectively, the surface displacement and the horizontal particle velocity at the left side of the control volume. Equation (1.9) can be rewritten in the form
0y
mou 
I'O(~yO2Ody) + OY2 d p
dz dt + p
'
(1.10)
mo,  me + Am = 0
yields
~ 02q5 dz + (~Y)z
Oy 2
Or/
Or/ _ 0
+ ot '
(1.11)
apart from some negligible terms. Let us consider the integral on the 1.h.s. of this equation. Thanks to the continuity equation (1.4), we have
=e'
(1.12)
where the term (O~/Oz)z=_ d is zero because it represents the vertical particle velocity at the bottom, which is zero if the bottom is horizontal. Therefore equation (1.11) is reduced to 0(__0~_z )z 0(__~_y )z Or/ OI7 =,=, ~ + Ot which is the general equation of the free surface. In the proof we have assumed the bottom to be horizontal. But the same result holds even if the bottom is sloping. In this more general case d denotes the bottom depth at the left side of the small control volume, so that the bottom depth at the right side is d + (dd/dy) dy. Therefore, the lower limit in the integral on the r.h.s, of equation (1.10) changes, and (1.11) takes a new term: (1.13)
Oy T
Orl
O(_~y )z
=_.
d y +
dd
Orl = 0 .
Ot
(1.14)
Periodic wave pattern: the approach of differential calculus Moreover the boundary condition becomes O(__~Z) .... /
__
O(__~y)~ d d .... t dY
which taken together with (1.12) and (1.14) leads us again to the equation (1.13) of the free surface. 1.2.2 The system of equations On the whole, in an irrotational twodimensional flow with a free surface, functions 0 and ~7must satisfy the following system of equations: (__~)~
='q
+2Lk0yj
:,,Oy
1 [(0~)2 + (Oq;) 2]
\OzJ
_ if(t)
'
(1 15a)
l z =rl 
O(__~Z )~
O(__~y )
Or/
&/
07'
(1 15b)
02~f 02~ = O,
Oz
(1.15c)
O(~z)~= d  O.
(1.15d)
The first one says that the pressure is zero on the free surface (atmospheric pressure being taken as reference pressure); it proceeds straightforwardly from the Bernoulli equation. The second one is the general equation of the free surface, which we have just obtained. The third and fourth ones are, respectively, the continuity equation and the condition of the solid boundary which have been rewritten in order to get a general overview of the whole system of equations. As to the solid boundary condition, it has been specified for a horizontal bottom, which is the case being examined in the rest of this chapter.
Chapter 1
.
(a)
L Y
~_
~\ I_0
't
(b)
Fig. 1.5
(a) Waves on the space domain. (b) Waves on the time domain.
distance between the two extreme zeros of the wave; wave period T which represents the time lag between the two extreme zeros of the wave. Besides these three parameters, it is convenient to define (i) the wave amplitude
a  HI2,
The scheme of fig. 1.6 should be useful to understand the wave motion. Each point in the figure moves along a circular orbit, with constant speed. The time taken to cover the orbit (circumference) is T, and the figure shows two instant pictures taken at a time interval of T / 4 from each other. The line connecting the points represents a wave. We see the wave advance of L / 4 in a time interval of T / 4 , and this means that the propagation speed (celerity) of the wave is
c=L/T.
the circular orbits). The particle speed v is not only generally propagation speed c of the wave, but we can even vary v modifying c: it suffices to fix period T and length L (which the distance between the circumferences) and let radius R vary.
rotation
Fig. 1.6 Each point moves along a circular orbit of radius R in a time T; the line connecting the points is a wave whose propagation speed is LIT.
Finally, a last item before passing to the mathematical treatment of the wave motions. Let us imagine that we make a blob of two colours (e.g. red and black) within the water mass in a wave. If we put the red on top of the black, generally we should see that the red remains over the black, just as we see that the man's head remains above his feet on the wheel in fig. 1.2. In other words, we should see that the blob does not rotate, which denotes irrotational flow.
A physical approach
Let us fix the period and the swinging amplitude, and let us set the wavemaker in motion. Waves with a height H~ will form. Let us stop the wavemaker, and let us set the engine in a different manner: same period, smaller swinging amplitude. Then let us start again. Waves with a height H2 smaller than HI will form. The wave period will be the same as before. Indeed the wave period proves to be the same as the swinging period of the wavemaker. Let us repeat the process many times: each time with the same period T and with wave heights smaller and smaller. Doing so, in the first wave generations, which are the ones with the greater heights, we shall note asymmetry between the wave crest and trough: the crest will be steeper than the trough. Then, we shall find that a gradual lowering of the wave height, under the same period, leads to waves with smaller asymmetry: the wave approaches a sinusoid with a wavelength which depends on d and T. Summarizing: as H 0 (d and T fixed) " r/(y , t)   ~H cos 2 2(T y \L 27r t~ T / ' (1 16) "
where, for the moment, wavelength L is unknown. Function (1.16) represents a periodic wave of length L on the space domain and it represents a periodic wave of period T on the time domain. The negative sign in the cosine implies that the wave travels along the yaxis (with a positive sign the wave would travel in the opposite direction).
10
Chapter 1
Generating waves with smaller and smaller heights (and a fixed period) we shall also note that the velocity components, at any fixed depth, will tend to fluctuate in spacetime like r/(y, t): Vy in phase with r/, and Vz with some phase angle. Moreover, the particle speed will prove to be proportional to the wave height. In this, the phenomenon is similar to the one depicted in fig. 1.6. In that figure the wave height is equal to 2R, and the particle speed is equal to 27rR / T. Therefore, if we reduce R with the same T, the wave height and the particle speed are reduced in the same way. From these observations on particle velocity, we can draw the following identikit of the velocity potential: as H ~ 0 (d and T fixed): q5(y, z, t) =
2(_L_ Y  ~ tT
+ e) +f2 (t),
(1.17)
where fl(z; d, T, L) denotes a function of z, in which parameters d, T and L may be present. For the moment, functions fl and f2 and phase angle e are unknown. 1.4.2
The equations (1.16) and (1.17) show that both r/and q5are infinitesimal of order H. In particular, the fact that r/ is infinitesimal enables us to rewrite equations (1.15ab) in the form g~7+ (&)z :0 + ( 02qS)z
OzOt : 0 r / + 2
1 [ ( 0 q ~ 2 + (0q5~2]
\ OyJ
k,Oz J ] Z=0
+ (1.18a) 0rl
+7 (~z)
:0+\Oz2)z:0 
(02c~'~[O(fffy)z(02c)) z
:0+
OzOy
] &7
07'
(1.18b)
where the value of a function at z = r/has been expressed as: [value of the function at z = 0] + [value of the derivative with respect to z, at z = 0] x r/. Neglecting the terms of orders smaller than or equal to H 2, equations (1.18ab) are reduced to
0O (& )z
=0
(1.19a) (1.19b)
11
At this point, the problem is how to obtain functions fl, f2, length L and phase c (provided they exist) in such a way that the two forms (1.16) and (1.17) of r/and q5 satisfy equations (1.19ab) as well as (1.15cd). The problem has only one solution, as will be evident from the following analysis. 1.4.3 Solution for c) Substituting the forms of r / a n d q5 in (1.19a), we have d H H fl(0; d, T,L) co sin(ky  c o t + c) + d~f2(t)   g  ~ c o s ( k y
cot) + p f ( t ) ,
and the only way for the function of y and t on the 1.h.s. of this equation to be equal to the function of y and t on the r.h.s., for every y and t, is that
1 )q (0; d, T, L)  ~gco1 ,
(1.20a) (1.20b)
c
rc 2 ,
f2(t)  P
f(t
dt'.
(1.20c)
(Clearly, an arbitrary constant can be added to f2(t), but such a constant proves to be wholly insignificant for what follows.) Thanks to (1.20bc) the identikit (1.17) of q5 becomes more precise: (y, z, t)   H f~ (z; d, T, L) sin (ky  cot ) + P
(1.21)
The more general form of f~ so that this function of ~ satisfies (1.15c) is f~ (z; d, T, L) = A exp (kz) + B exp (  k z ) , with A and B arbitrary constants. The values of these constants can be obtained thanks to condition (1.20a) and equation (1.15d). The result is A   1 gco' exp (kd) 2 exp (kd) + exp (kd) ' so that (1.21) becomes H 1 cosh [k (d + z)] sin (ky  cot) + 7 05(y, z, t)  g  ~ c o cosh (kd)
1 gco1
2
f (t dt'.
{1.22)
Chapter 1
At this stage there is only equation (1.19b) to be satisfied, and only one parameter is left unknown: L or k  27r / L. The use of functions (1.16) and (1.22) in equation (1.19b) yields 2 k tanh (kd)  w , (1.23) g that is, in terms of L and T rather than of k and w,
L gT22rr t a n h ( 2rrd)L
dispersion rule.
1.4.5 The effect o f f u n c t i o n f (t)
(1.24)
which relates L to d and T. Such a relation is most commonly used in ocean engineering, both in the form (1.23) and in the form (1.24), and it is called the linear
Since f ( t ) is an arbitrary function of time, the velocity potential (1.22) is indeterminate. But the functions which are of interest, that is to say v (y, z, t), and p (y,z, t), prove to be independent of f (t) and thus they are definite. In particular, the components of vector v proceed through (1.3) and prove to be
Hw ~ Vy(y, z, t)  g 2 1 k cosh [k (d + z)] c o s ( k y  w t), cosh (kd) 1 k sinh[k(d + z)] s i n ( k y  w t). cosh (kd) (1.25a)
w Vz (y, z, t)  g ~2
(1.25b)
As to the pressure, it is obtained by means of the Bernoulli equation (1.5). The result is H cosh [k (d + z)] cos (ky wt) p (y, z, t)   p g z + pg ~ 2 cosh (kd) (where the terms of orders smaller than or equal to hence the fluctuating pressure head proves to be 2 cosh (kd)
H 2
(1.26)
Clearly the formulae for p and ~ph are valid for z _< ~, and the formula for ~/ph requires in addition z to be smaller than or equal to zero. Indeed (1.26) presupposes that the static pressure is pgz. To this purpose, note that, in the whole text, Zlph denotes the fluctuating pressure head only at points which are always beneath the water surface, where (1.26) is of course valid.
13
gT 2
271
(1.27)
Since the range of tanhx is (0,1), it follows that L <L0, with L approaching L0 on deep water. The calculation of L can be done through an iterative approach, by means of Li  L0 tanh (27r d J' L~_~ for i  1, 2, 3 and so on. In this way the following inequalities are obtained: (1.29)
To verify these inequalities, one has simply to analyse the quotient Li/L that proceeds from (1.28), (1.29)" LiL = tanh (27r " dL )/ta i n h_ (~ 2Ld) Indeed, being L0 > L, it follows: L1 < L and consequently L2 > L which in turn implies L3<L, and so on. Sequence (1.29) converges, that is the difference }Lz Li_~] approaches zero as i grows. 1.5.2 Calculation of d/L from d/Lo From (1.28) it follows that d tanh L rc Lo . (1.30)
The value of d/L which satisfies this equation is equal to the special value 2 for which the function f (x)  xtanh (27rx) (1.31)
14
Chapter 1
is equal to the given value d/Lo. Function (1.31) is strictly increasing, it being the product of two functions, x and tanh (27rx), which are strictly increasing. Therefore, only one abscissa corresponds to a given ordinate [cf. fig.l.7]. To obtain 2, one calculates f(x) at regular increments Ax until f (x)> d/Lo is found. At this point, one goes back a step ZXx, then fixes a smaller Ax, and continues until the abscissa 2 is reached with the desired degree of precision.
f(x)
d L
In the following there are a number of parameters which depend on kd, and we shall represent these parameters as functions of d/Lo. This is because for every k d  27rd/L there is exactly one d/Lo and vice versa.
1.5.3
1 the difference between L and L0 is smaller than d/Lo~, 0.4%. The difference between L and L0 gets even smaller for d/Lo > .1 For this
1 2 reason, the waves on water depth d > ~ L0 are called waves on deep water.
Periodic wave pattern: the approach of differential calculus 1.5.4 A s i m p l i f i c a t i o n valid f o r waves on deep water The modes of attenuation from the free surface to the seabed are cosh [k (d + z)] cosh (kd) sinh [k (d + z)] cosh (kd)
15
A1 (z) 
A2(z) 
The first one is the mode of the horizontal velocity and the pressure fluctuation (cf. equations 1.25a and 1.26); the second one is the mode of the vertical velocity (cf. equation 1.25b). The two modes can be rewritten in the form
A1 (z)  exp (kd)exp (kz) + exp (  k d ) e x p (  k z ) exp (kd) + exp (  k d ) A2 (z)  exp (kd) exp (kz)  e x p (  k d ) e x p (  k z ) exp (kd) + exp (  k d )
from which, bearing in mind that Ikzl < kd, we get lim A1 ( z )  exp (kz)  O, lim A2 (z)  exp (kz)  O.
kd~oc
kd~ec
Therefore, for high values of kd, both A1 and A2 can be assumed to be equal to exp(kz). Such an assumption leads to errors on A1 and A2 within 0.04 if d/Lo  0.5, within 0.02 if d/Lo  0 . 6 , and within 0.01 if d/Lo = 0.7. In appraising these errors, bear in mind that A1 and A2 range between 0 and 1.
1.5.5 A n a l y t i c a l exercise: get an explicit f o r m f o r the w a v e l e n g t h From the definition of wave celerity (c  L/T) and the definition of L0, we have
c2 gd
_/tanh(kd)
(1.32)
Since
X
t a n h x x ~
3

O (x s)
asx~0,
(1.33)
16 where O means
Chapter 1
of the order,
taxx = 1  ~
x 2
+ O (x 4)
as x + 0,
which enables us to rewrite (1.32) in the form c v/gd At this stage, let us express  1 (kd)2 6 ~ 0 (kd) 4 as
kd
+ O.
(1.34)
kd
in terms of
d/Lo.
( )d2
L0
as
d
L0
+0
2re d)v/gd,
6 L0
(1.35)
For d/Lo <_0.20, (1.35) leads to an error on L within 0.25%, that is negligible. Equation (1.35) is useful since it covers the range of small d/Lo where the sequence (1.29) converges more slowly.
1.6 The
flow
field
1.6.1
F r o m e q u a t i o n s (1.25ab) of Vy and Vz, one can d r a w the s u m m a r y of fig.l.8a. Such a figure shows the particle velocity in a wave, on the space d o m a i n , at a fixed t i m e instant. T h e h o r i z o n t a l particle velocity is positive u n d e r a w a v e crest a n d
17
negative under a wave trough. The vertical particle velocity is positive between a crest and the following trough, while it is negative between a trough and the following crest. This is correct given that the water surface is rising between a crest and the following trough: the trough has just passed and the crest is arriving. The summary is reproposed in fig.l.8b, on the time domain, at a fixed point. We see that the horizontal particle velocity is positive when a wave crest passes over the fixed point, and is negative when a wave trough passes. We also see that the vertical velocity is negative on the time interval between a crest and the following trough, and in fact during this interval the water surface at the fixed point is going down. On the contrary, the vertical velocity is positive during the interval between a trough and the following crest, and in fact during this time interval the water surface at the fixed point must rise. (a)
I
:,'::::/:,~:::::7::~:7i:}.: ':7:!).> :i .: , :: .,{?! i:::/! 5.,:, :,. := ::::if :i:: " ,' ,." .Z<: ::7 .:.
(b)
nd vz
Fig. 1.8 Direction of vy and vz" (a) at a fixed time instant; (b) at a fixed point.
From (1.25ab) of the particle velocity we draw the particle acceleration, by means of equation (1.8). Neglecting the terms of order H 2, the result is H cosh [k (d + z)] sin (ky  cot), ay (y, z, t)  g  ~ k cosh (kd) H k sinh [k (d + z)]
c o s h (ka)
a~ (y, z, t)   g 7 
cos ( k y 
t)
~'~ t ay and az
7 7
Fig. 1.9 Direction of ay and az at a fixed point.
18
Chapter 1
Fig. 1.9 shows the particle acceleration on the time domain, at a fixed point. We see the horizontal acceleration is negative on the time interval between a crest and the following trough, which is consistent with the fact that the horizontal velocity on this time interval at the fixed point passes from m a x i m u m to minimum. As to the vertical acceleration, it is positive in the interval between a zero downcrossing and a zero upcrossing of the surface displacement; and this is consistent with the fact that under a zero downcrossing the vertical velocity reaches a m i n i m u m and under a zero upcrossing it reaches a maximum. 1.6.2 Particle displacement Let us fix a water particle P; as an example let us think of the particle that at t = 0 is at point y = 0,z (z being arbitrarily fixed). Let us call re(t) and U(t) respectively the velocity and the position of the particle relative to its initial position (y = 0, z). The velocity vp can be expressed in the form
p(t), (o, z, t)+ o[_ y (o, z, t)] my(t)+ [bT z (o, z, t)1 (t),
where the first term on the r.h.s, is of order H, while the second one and the third one are of order H 2. Therefore the velocity vp(t) is equal to v ( 0 , z , t ) apart from some difference of order H 2, and hence the particle displacement is given by
Uy(t)Uz (t) 
Uy(t)g
H
cosh(kd)
_2k sinh [k (d + z)] [cos (~t)  1].
Uz(t)g
~03
cosh (kd)
Vector U (t) represents an elliptic orbit whose horizontal and vertical diameters are respectively
Do 
H
tanh (kd)
(1.36)
D =H
19
Three comments. First: if we change the initial abscissa y, the phases of Uy and Uz generally change, but the orbit does not change, that is Do and Du do not change. Second: as kd . oc, for any fixed kz, Do and D~ tend to coincide with each other, and consequently the orbit becomes circular. Third: the horizontal particle displacement (Do) reduces itself, from the water surface to the seabed, according to an hyperbolic law [see (1.36)], while the horizontal displacement at the w a v e m a k e r reduces itself linearly. The consequence is that the first two or three waves after the w a v e m a k e r show some differences from what is expected by (1.16).
(1.37)
where r/' and ~b' are the terms of order H, the formulae for which are respectively (1.16) and (1.22), r/" and 05" are the terms of order H 2 which we shall obtain in what follows, and o ( H 2) is for terms of orders smaller than H 2, that is terms of order H 3, H 4, and so on. F r o m definition (1.37) we have
0* (~)Z
:,
This is the form exact to the order H 2 of one of the terms of the system of equations (1.15). Similarly, we can also write the form exact to the order H 2 of the other terms of the aforesaid system of equations. The result is
I g,' [ + gr/"+
(O~tl)
\ Ot J~:o + ot
=0 +
( 02~t'~ 71I
1 (OqS'~ 2
\~zOZ/z=0 + g \ T I ~ : 0
+7 (OZjz
(1.38a)
0~'~ 2
7f(z
,
OT]" + ~
k Oz/z:o
\ OY Jz:o Oy
&
Ot
(1.38b)
(1.38c)
020 ,
020"
020,
a:O ,,
(1.38d)
20
Chapter 1
where the framed terms form the linear equations which are satisfied if r/' and qS' are given by (1.16) and (1.22). Therefore the framed terms can be cancelled.
1.7.2 S o l u t i o n f o r rl" a n d 0" In order to solve the system (1.38ad) of the two unknown functions r/" and 4/' we differentiate with respect to time all terms of (1.38a), multiply by g all terms of (1.38b), and finally add (1.38b) to (1.38a); in doing so we eliminate r/", that is we obtain an equation with only the unknown function ~", and the known functions r/' and qS'. Then, substituting r/' and qS' by their expressions (1.16) and (1.22), we get 3 H 2 ~ 3 1 1  tanh 1 1 sin [2 ( k y  a~t)]. 82 (kd) ~ (1.39)
Therefore function ~" must satisfy this equation proceeding from (1.38ab) as well as the equations (1.38cd). The solution is a function of the kind
At this stage, having obtained the expression of qS" (apart from constants B and C), we can obtain the expression of r/" by means of (1.38a). The result is
F1 (kd)  3 
(1.40)
Constant B can then be obtained given that the mean surface displacement is zero, so that the water mass in the tank is the same under the wave motion as when it is calm. The conclusion is
H 2 0.)2 ~" (y,t) = ~ ~ F 1 16 g
( k d ) c o s [ Z ( k y  wt)],
(1.41a)
21
dp"(y,z,t) 
16
sinh 2 (kd)
t+Cy,
(1.41b)
d/iL0 
0.5
1.0
The quotient between the amplitude of the nonlinear term ~/" and the amplitude of the linear term r/' is
~F~ (kd) , 8 Lo
and hence it becomes greater as H/Lo becomes greater and/or as d/Lo becomes smaller (fig. 1.10 shows that F~ (kd) grows as d/Lo gets smaller). The nonlinearity effects also attack the pressure head waves. Let us see how. The second order component of the fluctuating pressure head can be obtained by means of (1.5) and is related to 4)' and 4/' by the equation r/~,
27r H
h
g Ot
1 0~"
2g
(.o+'.) 2
\~yJ
t,,Ozz )]
(1.42)
22
Chapter 1
"
'
"
Fig. 1.11 The second order term ~" makes the wave crest steeper, and flattens the wave trough.
where rl"phi is the term depending on qS", a n d T];th2 is the term depending and (Od?'/Oz)2:
on
(O~'/Oy) 2
1;,h~ ( y , z , t )  ~7"
1H2aj2{ 16 g
3 sinh4(kd ) c o s h [ 2 k ( d + z ) ] c o s [ 2 ( k y  c o t ) ]
+ sinh2(kd )
(1.43a)
ph2 (Y z,
t)
 
Let us consider now what happens if we add the nonlinear term ~ph ~phl ~ ~ph2 l II to the linear term TIp h (given by 1.26). The effect of T]phl iS similar to the effect of ~7": II it enhances the crest elevation and reduces the trough depth. On the contrary, rlph2 " I /r/" reduces the crest elevation and enhances the trough depth. As k d   + oc, T]phl ph2 approaches zero. As k d + O, ?]phl/7]ph2 t e n d s to infinity. Therefore, as k d ~ oc, 7]ph2 prevails o n ?]phi, vice versa as k d ~ O. Specifically, for d / L o > 0.20, ~]ph2 prevails and hence the pressure head waves undergo a deformation like that of fig. 1.12; while II T]phl prevails if d / L o < 0.20 and hence on this domain the pressure head waves undergo a deformation of the same kind as that of the surface waves, even if in a more attenuated form because of the effect of rlph2. Finally, a comparison of (1.43ab) with (1.26) reveals that the nonlinear term of the fluctuating pressure head decreases, from the water surface to the seabed, more
II II I! o II It
23
(r/" ~ prevails Fig. 1.12 Pressure head waves on deep water where the second nonlinear term ~ ph2] (rlphi). " over the first nonlinear term ~
rapidly t h a n the linear term. T h e r e f o r e the incidence of the nonlinear t e r m is greater n e a r the w a t e r surface than n e a r the bottom.
w h e r e A is a dimensional constant and F (t) a function of time, both of which are to be d e t e r m i n e d . W i t h o u t the c u r r e n t ( u 0), A is equal to g H 2 _~ [cf.(1.22)].
Naturally, with the current, A will d e p e n d on u. Let us seek k~, A and F (t) such that r / a n d q5 satisfy the differential equations
(1.15abcd) of general validity. As to (1.15cd), it is easy to verify that they are satisfied w h a t e v e r the kc, A and F ( t ) . Let us now pass to the two most exacting
equations, that is to say (1.15ab).
24
Chapter 1
This time OO/Oy is the sum of the finite term u and of a term of order H being due to the wave. Therefore the terms ~y~)]
=~
and
O(__~y )z
Orl =,, Oy
respectively of (1.15a) and of (1.15b) are no longer negligible to Stokes' first order, and these equations yield
g2coskcy__=_
cot) . + P(t) +  ~ .
1 u2
cot)
7 f (t),
(1.44a)
co sin (kcy  cot), (1.44b) Akctanh (kcd) sin (kcy  cot) =  u ~ kc sin (key  cot) + 2 2 w h e r e / ~ (t) denotes the derivative of F (t). Equation (1.44a) is satisfied if and only if
1 u2t + l 2 p
f (t')dt'
'
c) (y, z, t)  uy + g ~
H (co uk~) 1 cosh[kc (d + z)] sin (kcycot) __L u2t + i cosh (kcd) 2 p
f (t,) dt,.
(1.45)
(Clearly, an arbitrary constant can be added to F (t), but it has no effect on the wave mechanics.) Finally, (1.44b) is satisfied if and only if k~tanh (k~d)

(co
bl'c/21("~
g
(1.46)
This is the equation that relates k~ to d, T and u, and for u = 0 it coincides correctly with the linear dispersion rule.
1.9.2 Solution f o r the wavelength If we multiply by d both sides of (1.46) and use definition (1.27) of L0, we can rewrite (1.46) in the form
Lc
d tanh
7r
a
Lc
'
(147)
"
25
and where
d/Lo
__
L0 of (1.47) assumes the indeterminate Thus (1.47) reduces itself correctly to positive value of x (provided that it (27rx)
with C o  L 0 / T and u ~ 0. [Note, the r.h.s, form 0. oc as u + 0, and it approaches d/Lo. (1.30) as u approaches zero.] The d/L~ satisfying (1.47) is equal to the exists) such that function f~ (x) _= x t a n h is equal to function
f2 (x)  a ( x 
b) 2 .
The two functions fl (x) and f2 (x) are r e p r e s e n t e d in fig. 1.13 for d / L o  0.2 and a few values of u/co. The graph of f2 (x) is a p a r a b o l a whose ordinate at x  0 is equal to d/Lo w h a t e v e r the u/co. The vertex of the parabola falls at x  b, and thus it falls on the positive xaxis or on the negative xaxis, according to w h e t h e r u is greater or smaller than zero. If u is greater than zero, (1.48) has two solutions: (d/Lc)l smaller than b and (d/L~)2 greater than b [cf. fig. 1.13a]. We discard the second solution, that is (d/L~)2, if we assume d/Lc to be a continuous function of u, so that d d lim   = . ,,~o Lc L (1.49)
Indeed (d/L~)~+d/L as u+ 0; while (d/Lc)2 being greater than b, tends to infinity. If u is smaller than zero, we have three cases: (i) weak negative current: (1.48) admits two solutions, (ii) transition from w e a k to strong negative current: (1.48) admits only one solution; (iii) strong negative current: (1.48) does not admit any solution, which means that the wave is not able to travel against the stream.
26
Chapter 1
(a)
U=Co/2
u=0
(o)
0.5
0.5
/ 0
! i
d/Lc= .132 !
0.5
(c)
(a)
u=co/6
1
Ucrit=Co/4
0.5
0.5
[d/L~ = .33710.5
0.5
c=.
(e)
0.5
O.5
Fig. 1.13 The wavelength on given water depth d/Lo = 0.2 for: (a) a positive current; (b) no current; (c) a low negative current; (d) the critical negative current; (e) a strong negative current, for which the equation (1.47) does not admit any solution (the wave is not able to travel against the stream).
27
The three cases are represented in figs. 1.13cde. In the case of the weak negative current, the solution to be discarded is again the second one because the first solution satisfies condition (1.49) as u approaches zero, whereas the second solution tends to infinity. The transition from weak to strong negative current occurs for a critical value of lU/Col, which we shall call lU/C0]crit, that depends on d/Lo. As discussed above, as u ~ 0, the vertex of the parabola representing f2 (x) falls at an infinitely large x. Specifically, as u ~ 0+, the vertex of the parabola is at x , + oc, while as u ~ 0_, the vertex of the parabola is at x +  o c . Moreover, as x   , 0, the curvature of the parabola approaches zero. Therefore, as u  + 0 the parabola approaches a horizontal line of ordinate d/Lo, on any finite interval including the origin x = 0, [see fig. 1.13b]. The whole set of pictures 1.13ae shows that L~ d
d <~d e : ~ L c > L
L d
if if
u>0, u<0.
Lc
>
~=~Lc<L
Thus, according to intuition, the wavelength grows if waves and current have the same direction, while the wavelength shortens if waves and current have opposite directions. 1.9.3 The critical negative current Let us discuss further the case of the negative current (u < 0). Firstly we consider what is the value of lU/C0lcrit for the basic case of d/Lo , oc. Since Lc < L if u < 0, it follows d d ~ oc as ~ oc. Lc L0 Therefore equation (1.47) reduces itself to ~=a
(d
Lc
Lc
as
d
Lo
~ (2~ ~
abAs a consequence: lu I _1
 ~ 0 crit
u = Co
1. 4
d + OO. L0
as
For the case of a finite d/Lo, we have to seek the U/Co such that equation (1.47) is satisfied by only one d/Lc. This operation can be executed numerically. In doing so
28
Chapter 1
]U/Colcrit grows
To prove this, let us imagine a point moving with a uniform speed L I T along a straight line making an angle 0 with the yaxis. If the point starts from x  0, y  0 at time t = 0, its position is given by
Xp = ~
L L t sin O, yp = t cos O, T T
so that the surface displacement at this point proves to be ~ 2 cos t sin 2 0 + 27r t cos 2 0 T T 2 '
and hence it keeps constant in time, which confirms that the trajectory and speed of the wave is coincident with the trajectory and speed of the point. The velocity potential associated with surface displacement (1.50) is H co1 cosh[k(d + z)] sin(kxsinO + kycosO  cot). q5(x, y, z, t)  g 2 cosh (ka) (1.51)
Here we can readily verify that the two functions (1.50) and (1.51) satisfy equations (1.19ab) [provided that f (t) = 0 in (1.19a)] as well as the boundary condition at the bottom (equation 1.15d). Note: these equations, having been obtained for the twodimensional flow yz, retain their validity even for the threedimensional flow xyz, as can be easily inferred from the fact that they depend only on z not on y. As to f ( t ) = 0, we have already seen v and p do not change whatever the f ( t ) and therefore it is justified and advisable to put directly f (t)  0 in the equation (1.19a). Of the whole system of the linear flow equations, that is the system consisting of (1.15cd) and (1.19ab), the only equation which needs to be adjusted from the twodimensional to the threedimensional flow is (1.15c). For the threedimensional flow it becomes
02(75
which is satisfied by function (1.51).
(92(75
0q2(75 0
,
29
reflected waves
~/////~/////////////////////////~
~////////////////////////////////~
30 H
Chapter 1
....
~7(x, y, t)  ~ c o s ( k x s i n O 2
+ kycosO~t)+
+ e), (1.53a)
~(x,y,z,t)
H  g 2 _~
..,_.
H 1 cosh [k (d + z)] sin (/x sin 0 + / c y cos (~ &t + e) +g2co . cosh (kd)
(1.53b)
 0,
(1.54)
k cos 0
= _ ~ &  i / ~ cos 0 cosh [/~ (d + z)] cos (kx sin 0  cOt + e), cosh (/~d) and it is satisfied for every x, z and t if and only if
 co => fc  k , I2I  H , OT r  O, c  n 2 rc
(1.55)
with
n0,1,2...
(1.56)
B e c a u s e of the equalities (1.56), the two functions (1.53ab) can be r e w r i t t e n in the form (x, y, t)  H cos ( k x sin 0  cot) cos ( k y cos 0), (1.57a)
c~ (x, y, z, t)  g H ~ 1 cosh [k (d + z)] sin ( k x sin 0  cot) cos ( k y cos 0). (1.57b)
cosh(kd)
Verify that functions (1.53ab) satisfy the linear flow equations, that is to say the system consisting of the equations (1.15cd) and (1.19ab), with f (t) = 0. Apply the following; if a pair of functions r/l, ~l satisfy a homogeneous linear system, and a second pair of functions r/2, ~b2 satisfy the same system, then the sum T]l + ?]2, (ill _ql_(]52 also satisfies this system of equations. Here ~71, ~l are functions (1.5051), ~2, ~b2 are functions (1.52ab) and ~/1 + ~72, ~bl + q~2 are functions (1.53ab). To prove (1.56), bear in mind that two cosine functions are equal to each other all over their domains, if and only if they have the same frequency, same amplitude and phase angle of some multiple of 27r. Then, examining the 1.h.s. and r.h.s, of (1.55) as functions of t for any fixed pair x, z, you will easily realize that must be equal to co, which implies / ~  k. Similarly, examining the 1.h.s. and r.h.s, of (1.55) as functions of x for any fixed pair z, t, you will easily realize that/~ sin 0 must be equal to k sin 0, which implies sin 0 = sin 0. The rest of the proof follows straightforwardly. Note: if the breakwater were not at y = 0 but at some parallel line, the phase angle c would be generally different from n 27r.
31
O(y,z,t)  gHcc'
(ky).
!
i
i i
"",,wall
%_'
i i I
L
~L
~
2
~
4
Fig. 1.15 Three snapshots of the wave field before an upright breakwater attacked orthogonally.
32
Chapter 1
At time t = 0, both l,,y and Vz are zero everywhere, given that both Vy and Vz are proportional to sin (c~ t). At that time (t = 0) the surface displacement gets up to its maximum (positive or negative) at each location. In particular, at the wall, the surface displacement at t = 0 is equal to the cresttotrough height of the incident wave. At time t = T~ 4 the surface displacement is zero everywhere given that r/ is proportional to cos (cot). The horizontal velocity has its negative maximum at 3 y =  L / 4 , and it has its positive maximum at y =    L . The vertical velocity has 4 its negative maximum at the wall (y = 0) and at y =  L, and it has its positive maximum at y =  L / 2. At time t = T~ 2 the surface displacement is opposite with respect to the surface displacement at t = 0. Thus a consistent picture emerges, where: (i) at time t = 0 , the water surface is higher than the M W L in the compartments @ and @, and is lower than the M W L in the compartments @ and @ (fig. 1.15); (ii) vice versa, at time t = T/2 the water surface is lower than the M W L in the compartments @ and @, and is higher than the M W L in the compartments @ and @; (iii) consistently, at the intermediate time instant t = T/4, the water flows from the compartments @ and @ towards the compartments @ and @. There are some points (nodes) where the surface displacement is always zero, and where the horizontal velocity attains its absolute maximum. These points are at 1 3 5 .. wavelength from the wall. Then there are the antinodes, at 0, 1 1 3 4' 4' 4'" 2' ' 2'"" wavelength from the wall, where the wave height (on the time domain) and the vertical velocity attain their absolute maximum. The wave height at the antinodes is 2H (that is, the height of the wave on the time domain), which is twice the wave height that would be there without the wall. The velocity maxima are also twice greater than the maxima in the absence of the wall.
1.11.3 The pressure distribution on the breakwater Whatever the angle 0 of the waves, the maximum pressure at any fixed section of the breakwater, according to Stokes' first order, is given by
which proceeds from equation (1.57b) of ~b, and can be rewritten in the equivalent form (apart from a term of order H2):
33
cosh [k (d + z)]
p (z)  pgz + pgH pg(Hz)
if
if
z<O,
(1.58) 0_<z<_H.
cosh (kd)
The wave pressure, that is the difference between (1.58) and the static pressure, is shown in fig. 1.16a.
(a)
ax=H+~
H2
L tanNkd)
MWL A7
I=
_L
pgd _______.
H g ~ cosh (kd)
H g ~ cosh (kd)
Fig. 1.16 The pressure exerted on an upright breakwater by a wave crest: (a) Stokes' linear theory; (b) Saintflou's model.
Fig. 1.16b shows Saintflou's model (1928). According to this model, we have to evaluate the two ends of the pressure distribution, that is (i) the elevation where the pressure becomes zero, which is the highest elevation reached by the water surface; (ii) the pressure at the lowest point of the wall. We then get the pressure distribution by linear interpolation between these two ends. Since the incidence of the second order term diminishes from the free surface to the seabed [cf. sect. 1.8], the second order term is taken into account in the evaluation of T ] m a x [the maximum surface displacement at the wall]: 7]max   H + 7r ~
H 2 1
tanh (kd)
while the pressure at the lowest point of the wall is calculated with the linear theory that is with (1.58)" p (z   d )
 pgd + pg
H cosh (kd)
34
Chapter 1
(1.59a)
H 1 cosh [k (d + z)] [G (r,/3; co, 0) cos (cot)  F (r,/3; co, 0) sin (cot)] (r,/3, z, t)  g 2 co cosh (kd) (1.59b) where
f(r,/~;co, O) ~ A(Ul)COSql +A(u2)cosq2  B(Ul)sinql  B(u2)sinq2,
1o (2)
sin
x 2 dx,
Io (2)
cos
x 2 dx,
Ul  2v/kr/rcsin [2 ( ~ + 0   2 )
1,
lg2  2v/kr/rcsin [2
(/3 0 + 2)],
Iy S
f
I X
Fig. 1.17 Reference scheme for the interaction between waves and a semiinfinite breakwater.
35
Let us arbitrarily fix a point r,/3 and let us write F and G in place of F (r,/3; co, 0) and G (r,/3; co, 0). The surface displacement on the time domain, at the fixed point, has its maxima and minima at time instants tm such that Wtm  arctan ( G ) . Equation (1.61) admits two solutions: sin(~tml) and sin (Lotto2)  G , v/F2 _+_G 2 G , v/F2 _+_6 2
c o s (C~tml) =
(1.61)
v/F2
_~_ G 2 "
(1.62)
Therefore tml is the time instant of the crest and tin2 the time instant of the trough at the fixed point. Clearly, instants tml and tin2 generally change from a point to another since they depend on functions F and G. The wavefronts [see fig. 1.18] are the lines connecting points with the same value of tml (or tin2).
2L
3L
1.12.2 T h e d i f f r a c t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t From (1.62) it follows that the wave height (that is, the height of the wave on the time domain) is H (r,/3)  H v/F 2 + G 2 .
36 (a)
1.13 1.14 1.11 .86 .90 .94 1.52 I I L53 I ~3 I 1.53 I I L54 ,I [56
I
Chapter 1
y/L
.32 .31 .30 .28 .26 .24
I I incident w a v e direction
(~
1~00 2~24 2:25 1~85 1:84 2:14 2Z14 1~89 1:89 2:10 2~11!
0.5
115
25
_x/L
Fig. 1.19 Diffraction coefficient if the incident waves approach the wall orthogonally: (a) behind the breakwater; (b) along the wave beaten wall.
(a)
y/L
1.02 1.02 .72 / , ~ / / 1.02 1.03 1.05 .92 1.12 1.02 .75 p~;3 .39 / / .99 .97 1.01 1.04 1.07 .78 / ~ 3 .38 .29 / .98 .98 .93 1.12 .92 / .83 z54 / / /_(5 .36 .35
.28
.97
1.130 .99
1.13
.97
/
) x/L
/ i ~
.27
,94
incident w a v e direction
i
i
i
(b)
1.~00' 1.67 I~98 2119 2".30 2".34 2".31 2".23 2".12 1.99 1~871
05
115
215
x/L
Fig. 1.20 Diffraction coefficient for a case of inclined attack: (a) behind the breakwater; (b) along the wave beaten wall.
37
As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the diffraction coefficient, which is defined as the quotient b e t w e e n the wave height at a given point and the height of the incident waves, is given by Cd (r, ~)  4 F 2 + G 2 . T h e Cd for two different angles of the wave direction are given in figs. 1.19 and 1.20. Of course, the diffraction coefficient at the sheltered side of the b r e a k w a t e r gets smaller and smaller with the distance from the tip of the b r e a k w a t e r . A t the wav~b e a t e n side of the b r e a k w a t e r ( / 3  27r), Cd takes on a m a x i m u m at about wavelength, or at s o m e w h a t m o r e than a w a v e l e n g t h according to w h e t h e r the wave attack is wallorthogonal (0 = 0) or inclined at 45 . In b o t h cases the m a x i m u m Cd is nearly 2.3, that is the m a x i m u m wave height at the wall is 2.3 times g r e a t e r than the height of the incident wave. The calculation of wave diffraction essentially consists in evaluating the Fresnel integrals [defined by (1.60d)]. In the numerical evaluation of these integrals one should bear in mind the nature of the function to be integrated. Such a function, that is s i n (7tx 2 / 2 ) or cos (Trx2/2), is a pseudosinusoid that progressively shrinks as x grows. If xi and xi+l are the abscissas of two consecutive maxima of function sin (7rx2/2) [see fig. 1.21], then they are given by 7r x~  i27r + 7r 2 2'
7I" X 2 2 i+1
(i+ 1)2rr +  rr 2
2
Xi
(1.63)
sin(~x2/2)
X4
Fig. 1.21 The function sin (7rx2/2) the integral of which (Fresnel integral) must be evaluated to obtain the diffraction coefficients.
38
Chapter 1
Such an inequality is useful in the choice of the integration step Ax. As an example if one wishes to evaluate the integral
J]sin(2x )ax
~ X = ~
with at least 12 steps for each pseudosinusoid, thanks to (1.63) it suffices that one fixes
1 2 12 lul
~ .
In the calculation one should bear in mind that u may be positive or negative. Since the integrand is an even function, it is convenient to take l ul as the upper limit of integration, and then multiplying the result by u/I u I.
Conclusive note
The theory of the periodic waves was introduced by Airy (1845) and was fully developed by Stokes (1847). The first graphic m e t h o d for the wavelength Lc on a current should be that of Jonsson et al. (1970). The wavecurrent interaction is usually treated with a reference flame moving with the current velocity. O u r choice for the fixed reference flame is in view of the developments of sect. 2.10. The fixed reference flame appears more suitable for obtaining the formal solution for the shoaling and setdown of waves on a current. Analytical solutions for the interaction wavesvertical wall are available also for the wall of finite length and the b r e a k w a t e r gap. The first one (Montefusco, 1968) gives the velocity potential as a series expansion of products of odd M a t h i e u functions. The second one (Sobey and Johnson, 1986) gives the velocity potential as a series expansion of products of even Mathieu functions.
References
Airy Co. B., 1845 Tides and waves. Encyc. Metrop. Art. 192, 241396. Jonsson I. G., Skougaard C. and Wang J. D., 1970 Interaction between waves and currents. Proc. 1 2 th Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE, 489507. Montefusco L., 1968 The diffraction of a plane wave by an isolated breakwater. Meccanica 3, 156166. Penny W. G. and Price A. T., 1952 The diffraction theory of sea waves by breakwaters. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. London A 244, 236253. Saintflou G., 1928 Essai sur les digues maritimes, verticales. Annales Ponts et Chaussdes 98, 4. Sobey R.J. and Johnson R.J., 1986 Diffraction patterns near narrow breakwater gaps. J. Waterways, Port, Coastal and Ocean Eng. 112, 512528. Stokes G. G., 1847 On the theory of oscillatory waves. Trans. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 8,441455.
39
 ~
v(t + d t ) d m m
v(t) dm ,
(2.1)
where E are all the forces acting on m, including body forces. Mass m at time t occupies volume W, while at time t + d t it occupies the volume W + JAY(t). n dA dt, where n is the unit vector which has a direction normal to surface A, positive outward. Referring to fig. 2.1, the volume occupied by the coloured water at time t + d t is equal to the volume occupied by the coloured water at time t, plus the darkened volume minus the dotted volume. Therefore
I,
where the first integral on the r.h.s, of this equation gives the linear m o m e n t u m of the water occupying volume W at time t + dt, and the next integral adds the linear m o m e n t u m of the coloured water which has flown out of W in the small time dt, and subtracts the linear m o m e n t u m of the noncoloured water which has entered W in the small time d t.
40
Chapter 2
V,
", A
::?!t
Fig. 2.1 Reference scheme for equation (2.2): W is the volume within the dashed surface; A is the dashed surface; m is the water mass that occupies W at time t.
Zei(t)
i
 ~
w/ g v ( t + d t ) d W +
pv(t+dt)v(t).ndAdt
wp v ( t ) d W ,
Z
i
Fi 
dW + JA I /9 0v Ot
W
/gvv. n d A .
(2.2)
As it is well known, W is called control volume and A is called control surface, and (2.2) is the linear m o m e n t u m equation for a control volume.
N
2.1.2 The case o f control v o l u m e W piercing the free surface Let us consider a control volume bounded by the seabed, by the free surface at a fixed time t, and by four vertical planes [see fig. 2.2a]. In this case, equation (2.2) can be rewritten in the form Fz 
p
Ot
dW +
F.S.
pvvndA +
pvvndA,
(2.3)
where F.S. denotes the free surface, a n d / i denotes the four vertical planes. For the step from (2.2) to (2.3), we have resolved the control surface A into three parts:
41
(a)
i i ! i t i
(b)
1
t
', ,,
section
i ,,
section
plan
plan
Fig. 2.2
the free surface, the four vertical planes, and the seabed which does not give any contribution to the integral since on the seabed v  n  0. Here it is more convenient to reason in terms of W the volume bounded by the seabed and by four infinitely high planes. Since d dt
pvdW
p~dW+ Ot
F.S.
pvv. n d A ,
(2.4)
pvvndA
(2.5)
that is the linear momentum equation for a control volume piercing the free surface. For a periodic wave motion, equation (2.5) implies that <~E><[
i JA
pvv.ndA
>,
(2.6)
where the symbol <  > denotes the average with respect to time: < f (t) >  ~ ,,
1 I]''+r
f (t) dt
(arbitrary to).
(2.V)
Equation (2.6) shows that the mean value of the resultant force acting on the control volume is equal to the mean value of the net efflux of linear momentum from the control volume. In the case of an ideal flow, the forces E in equation (2.6) reduce themselves to (i) the weight (  P i ~ ) of the water mass in W;
42
Chapter 2 (ii) the force Ff that the seabed and/or some solid bodies exert on the water
mass; (iii) the pressure force acting on the lateral surface A"

~ pndA,
where the minus is due to the fact that the unit vector n is oriented toward the outside of the control volume. Therefore, under ideal flow assumptions, (2.6) is rewritten in the form <  P i z + Ff >  < J~ p n + pvv. ndA >. To check (2.4), note that (2.8)
I pv(t+dt)dWJ
pv(t+dt)dW+IF
.s.
pv(t+dt)v(t).ndtdA,
2.2 T h e e n e r g y e q u a t i o n for a c o n t r o l v o l u m e
2.2.1 The energy per unit mass Newton's second law, when applied to a small water mass dm, can be written in the form
F x  d m dvx , dt
Fy  d m dry
dt '
Fz  dm dvz + dm g, dt
where dv represents the velocity variation of the given small mass dm in the small time interval d t, and where F here is the resultant of all the forces, except weight, acting on the small mass. Multiplying both sides of the first equation by Vx, both sides of the second equation by Vy, and both sides of the third equation by Vz, and adding up these equations we arrive at
dry
dvz
dt
(2.9)
43
ev 2
+gz.
(2.10)
Let us subdivide the coloured mass m, which at time t occupies the v o l u m e W, into m a n y small masses dm, and let us apply e q u a t i o n (2.9) to each of these masses (dm being the mass of a small volume dx dy dz). T h e r e f o r e we have N equalities like (2.9), one for each of the small masses dm. T h e n adding up these N equalities, we obtain Z(F'v)/~am
i=1
de
(2.11)
Pay attention to the symbols! dv/dt represents the quotient between the velocity variation of the given small mass in a small time interval dt, and dt itself. While Ov/Ot represents the quotient between the velocity variation at a fixed point in a small time interval dt, and dt itself. Thus in the case of dv/dt, the velocity variation depends on two causes: the fact that the time instant is slightly changed and the fact that also the position in space is slightly changed. While in the case of Ov/Ot the velocity variation depends only on the fact that the time instant is slightly changed. There is the same kind of difference also between de/dt and Oe/Ot. 2.2.2 The case o f the c o n t r o l v o l u m e W within the water m a s s
The explicit f o r m o f the 1.h.s. o f (2.11) Let us assume that the shear stresses are negligible. U n d e r this hypothesis, each small volume dx dy dz is subjected only to two c o m p o n e n t s of Fx: the first one acting
on the left face dy dz and the second one acting on the right face dy dz. Let us consider the contribution to the sum
N i=1
from a row of small volumes along a line parallel to the xaxis [see fig. 2.3]. This contribution, which we call partial sum, is partial sum = dy dz (p~  p2)v~l t dy dz (P2  p 3 ) v x 2 + ... I dy dz (p~  p,+ ~)vx~, which can be rewritten in the form partial sum = d y d z [p~ v,j +p2 ( v x 2  Vxl ) +...+pn(Vxn  Vxn l )  Pn+ I Vxn] , which in its turn can be rewritten in the form partial sum = [ ( P l V x l  P n + l vx~)dydz] +
En
i=2
dxdydz
~OX~
(2.12)
44
Chapter 2
(Fxvx)i  i=1
dW IzpVx n . ix d A + IWp ~x ON
w h e r e the two integrals on the r.h.s, c o r r e s p o n d , respectively, to the t e r m s within the first s q u a r e p a r e n t h e s e s , and to the s u m m a t i o n within the s e c o n d s q u a r e p a r e n t h e s e s on the r.h.s, of (2.12). T h r o u g h the s a m e r e a s o n i n g we can show that
Z
i=1
(Fyvy)i 
I~pry n . iy d A + j p 0~yd W
W Oy
Z (Fzvz)~  i=1
and, c o n s e q u e n t l y , we arrive at
(F. v ) i  /=1
w h i c h is r e d u c e d to
N
i=1
(Fv)i
~A p v . n dA,
(2.13)
given t h a t
__
Ig
dz
~ dx~
~ ~dx ~
dz
Fig. 2.3
Under ideal flow assumptions, the summation ~(Fxvx)i relevant to the row of small
i
volumes 1, 2, ..., n is equal to dydz(pl  p2)vxl + dydz(p2  p3)vx2 + ... + dydz(p,,  pn+l)Vxn
45
The r.h.s, of (2.11) can be rewritten in the form ~ d m and hence in the form ~dm
de
1  d[
?l
e(t+dt)dmm
e(t)dm
(2.14)
de
0e
Ot
dW
pe
w  n dA
'
(2.15)
where the logical step from (2.14) to (2.15) is the same as that which we have already done from (2.1) to (2.2).
N e w formulation o f (2.11)
Iw p 0e dW. Ot
(2.16)
2.2.3 T h e case o f the c o n t r o l v o l u m e W p i e r c i n g the f r e e s u r f a c e Let us pass to volume W whose definition has been given in sect. 2.1.2. Since
d dt
pedW 
I 0e
w p~ Ot
dW +
F.s.
pew. n d A ,
JA
Here,
(p + pe) v . n d A  J
F.S.
per. n dA 
dt
d J
pe dW.
(2.17)
(i) replacing pe with (p + pe) in the integral over F.S., which is simply a formal step since pressure p is zero on the free surface, (ii) subdividing the control surface into three components"/i, which is formed by the four vertical planes, the free surface F.S., and the seabed, we reduce (2.17) to f j" (p + pe)v. n d A  dd l ~i dt J
pedW.
(2.18)
46
(2.19)
which is exact under the ideal flow assumption given that we have neglected the shear stresses. 2.3 R a d i a t i o n stress, m e a n e n e r g y flux, m e a n w a v e e n e r g y per unit surface 2.3.1 Radiation stress As an exercise, try to apply equation (2.8) to the control volume of fig. 2.4. From the r.h.s, of this equation, you will get four double integrals, one for each of the vertical planes forming the lateral surface A. In particular, the integral relevant to the left yparallel plane will be
N
~2[ r/(Xl, y, t)
<
1 dd(xl, Y)
p ( x l , y , z , t ) (  i x ) pv(xl,y,z,t)[Vx(Xl,y,z,t)]dz dy >.
At this stage you will realize that the definition of the vectors
Rx  <
d
(2.20a)
Ry
 <
~r/ p iy q p v Vy
dz >
(2.20b)
d
Xl
X 2
/
: ::: ........... t ~: : : t I I :11 I:.. ....... ..... : :: ......
........
I

,: :: I I
i.....
,21
Fig. 2.4 For this control volume, the equations (2.8) and (2.19) are rewritten in the form (2.21) and (2.24), respectively.
47
leads to a m u c h m o r e c o m p a c t expression. I n d e e d you will be able to write the result of the exercise in the form
[ x2 Vl
I y2

(2.21)
Yl
To get this c o m p a c t form, you must also use the fact that <
IiI
.
... dz dy > d
I I'
<
Y1
.
(2.22a)
(2.22b)
As for the z  c o m p o n e n t , it is r e d u c e d to <Ff~> = <P>, since it can be shown that Rxz and Ry~ are zero in a wave motion. T h e tensor
.
is called radiation stress tensor. Usually, the radiation stress tensor is defined as the difference between the tensor R just defined and the same tensor under static conditions (where Rxy and Ryx are zero and Rxx and
1 2). Thus the definition we adopt here is somewhat different from the Ryy are equal to~pgd
usual definition of radiation stress. But it looks more convenient especially for giving the formal solution of sect. 2.10. 2.3.2 M e a n energy flux As a further exercise, try to apply e q u a t i o n (2.19) to the control v o l u m e of fig. 2.4. Also in this case you will obtain four double integrals, one for each of the vertical planes forming the lateral surface A. In particular, the integral relevant to the left yparallel side will be
<
Ii
d (x1, y)
48
Chapter 2
d
(p + pe)vdz > ,
(2.23)
you will be able to greatly compact the resulting expression, which will be reduced to
ji
1
ji
1
 ~ (x~, y) + ~ (x2, y) dy  0.
(2.24)
The vector is called mean energy flux. 2.3.3 M e a n w a v e e n e r g y p e r u n i t s u r f a c e Besides tensor R and vector ~, it is convenient to define  [mean energy per unit surface, in the wave motion] +  [energy per unit surface in static condition], that is
~ <

1
d
pe dz >  I 0 p gz dz.
d
(2.25)
2.4.1 P r o g r e s s i v e w a v e s o n g e n t l e s l o p e s What has been shown in sects. 2.123 holds generally, that is for waves travelling over arbitrarily shaped bottoms, or even for waves interacting with some structures (provided that Fs includes also the forces exerted by these structures). In the rest of this chapter we shall deal only with the progressive waves, that is with the waves which do not interact with structures. As to the seabed, we shall allow it to be generally nonhorizontal, but we shall assume the changes in water depth to take place very gradually (see fig. 2.5 and the relevant caption for the meaning of very gradually). Referring to the aforesaid fig. 2.5, in the area Ax Ay where the water depth is assumed to be constant, from Stokes' theory, we have
rl(s,t)  ~H cos (ks  cot) ~ 2 16
H2
(,o2
F~ ( k d ) c o s [ Z ( k s  cot)] + o (H2),
(2.26a)
49
.....
::
:.
::~I
~ '  ~
,:
f ~
Y/as"
X ~Ax
Ay~
~
Fig. 2.5 T h e a s s u m p t i o n is m a d e that the b o t t o m has a small slope, so that the w a t e r d e p t h is r e g a r d e d as a l m o s t c o n s t a n t in any a r e a with sides A x , Ay of a few w a v e l e n g t h s .
H 2
c~ s i n h 4 ( k d )
"
(2.26b)
cosh [2k (d + z)l sin [2 (ks  cJt)]    co 2 1 t + Cs + 0 (H2), 16 sinh 2 (kd) where s is the local wave direction, F~ ( k d ) is given by (1.40) and C is a constant of order H 2 which is still unknown (it will be obtained only in sect. 2.7). Clearly, the velocity components vx and v~, being necessary to the radiation stress tensor R, the mean energy flux ~ and the mean wave energy per unit surface ~, proceed from the velocity potential (2.26b) through the equations
11' x 
Os
COS O~,
Vy  
00 sin c~,
OS
where c~ is the angle that the local wave direction makes with the xaxis [cf. again fig. 2.51.
50
Chapter 2
Rxy  Ryx  ~
lj]j
d p Vx Vy dz dt,
(2.27)
that is
Rxy  Ryx

/9 ~
l ifjo d { H_, 2
g
The integrand having order H 2 c a n give at the most a contribution of order H 3 on the interval of integration (0, r/). This is why in the step from (2.27) to (2.28), the upper limit of integration has been changed from ~ to 0. Bearing in mind that 1 [r cos 2 (ks  cot) dt  1 T J0 2' from (2.28) we obtain
Rxy  Ryx
_
1 H2 [ 16 pg 1+
(2.29)
R.
 T
lj;j
~
p + pv~Z dz d t, p + pvyZ dz d t
d
Ryy  11 + I2 + Ly,
on defining
I~x

r
Ly
_
1jTI IITj
o ~
v 2 dz dt,
x
o d
p v 2 dz dt Y '
p d z dt,
To
 r 12
lfTj0
0 .
51
p dz dt.
(2.30)
The only difference between g~ and Rxy is that the integrand is V2xinstead of Vx vy. Since v~ v y  v2, cosc~sinc~ whereas v2x v2, cos2c~, it follows that L~ has the same expression as R,y with only cos2c~ in place of cosc~sin~. Similarly, Ly has the same expression as R~y with sin2c~ in place of cos c~sin c~:
L,x 16 p g H 2
1
1
{1 +
[
sinh (2kd)
2kd 1cOS2OL'
L,, 
16 p g H 2
Let us pass to 11 and/2. The pressure proceeds from the velocity potential (2.26b) through the Bernoulli equation, and to Stokes' second order proves to be [k (d + z)] cos (ks p   p g z + pg H 2 cosh cosh (kd) H2 1 cos{2(ks  cot)] + p 16co2 sinh 2 (kd)

cot) + ~6 p H 2 c o
2 p( v: " + v2) .
For getting I1 exact to the order H 2, it is sufficient to take into account the terms of order H of the pressure:
I~  T o o  p g z + pg ~
1jTj
where we have used the fact that H cosh [k (d + z)] = H + o ( H ) cosh (kd) Evaluating the integral, we obtain
11  ~
if
zIO(H).
pgH 2.
At this stage only/2 remains to be evaluated, for which we obtain H 2 co2 1 1 2 ~ d 12  ~ p g d + p 16 sinh 2 (kd) 1 pgH : 16 " (2.32)
The three terms on the r.h.s, of this equation derive from, respectively, the first, the fourth and the fifth terms on the r.h.s, of (2.31). As for the second and the third terms on the r.h.s, of (2.31), they give no contribution to 12.
52
Chapter 2 The conclusion is that Rxx, being the sum of 11, 12 and Lx, proves to be
Rxx  ~ pgd 2 +
pgH2 sinh(2kd) (1 + COS20L) "q COS20L],
(1 + sin2a) + sin2a].
(2.33)
(2.34)
where the integrand is of order H 2, and thus we can reduce the interval of integration from (  d , ~7) to (  d , 0) making at the most an error of an order smaller than H 2. Therefore we rewrite (2.34) in the form
(bx 1 ~1 I r [pg H cosh [k (d + z)] cos (ks  a;t)lVs cosa dt dz, d 0 2 cosh (kd)
Similarly, we get
(by  ~ pgH2 ~ 1 +
c[
(2.35)
~z=0, from which we conclude that vector ~ has the following norm: ~b 1 ~ pgH2~ c I1 +
2kd ] sinh (2kd) '
(2.36)
Periodic wave pattern: the control volume approach 2.4.5 The f o r m u l a f o r ~ With the definition (2.10) of e, equation (2.25) becomes
53
T o
pgz dz at +  7
where the interval of integration of the second double integral can be reduced from to (  d , r/) to (  d , 0), since the integrand is of order H 2. Then, it can be readily verified that each of the two double integrals (when divided by T) is equal to 1 pgH2, so that 16 { _ 1 pgH2" (2.37) 8 2.4.6 Comment: even the radiation stress tensor can be obtained with only the
I < p >
d
dz,
(2.38)
q d8
....
...3 t.. d$
Fig. 2.6 The small control volume used to obtain < p > at a given depth beneath the mean water level.
54
Chapter 2
where < p > represents the average pressure being dependent on z. To get < p > we can use (2.31) of p (and this is the straight path of sect. 2.4.3), or we can also apply the linear m o m e n t u m equation to the small control volume of fig. 2.6. The zcomponent of this equation when averaged over a wave period yields
p g ~ d s d q + < p >z ~ d s d q =

p<
12 2 > Z
Z : Z
dsdq,
(2.39)
where the two terms on the 1.h.s. are respectively the mean weight and the mean vertical force on the base, and the term on the r.h.s, is the mean flux of linear m o m e n t u m (zcomponent). Being ~ arbitrary, equation (2.39) is reduced to
<p >pgzp<v2>.
z
Here < v2 >, exact to the order H 2, can be obtained with only the linear form of ~b, and the result is H _ _ 2 ~2 k 2 sinh2 [k (d + z)] < p >   pgz  p g 2 8 cosh 2 (kd) + O (H2). Now, substitute the r.h.s, of this equation into (2.38). Evaluating the integral and using the linear dispersion rule, you will reobtain formula (2.32) for I2 without having resorted to the nonlinear terms of ~b.
2.5 The problem of the control volume extending from deep to shallow water
2.5.1 A p p l i c a t i o n o f the energy equation Let us consider the control volume of fig. 2.7, on a seabed with some xparallel contour lines. Since the cross section of the bottom is constant along the xaxis, also the wave height, the wave direction and the mean characteristics of the wave
Y2: I
jd2
Yt xi
x2
~dt
Fig. 2.7 The control volume extending from deep to shallow water, for the basic condition of straight contour lines.
55
motion are independent of x and depend only on y. The period is the same everywhere, indeed the period of the waves on the time domain at any point is equal to the period of the w a v e m a k e r (recalling that the periodic waves are generated by the periodic swing of a wavemaker). We shall call H~ and al respectively the wave height and the angle between the wave direction and xaxis on depth d~; and we shall call H2 and a2 the wave height and the angle between the wave direction and xaxis on depth d2. Given that vector ~ is constant along the xaxis, the compact notation ~by(y) is used in place of ~bu(x, y), and (2.24) is reduced to
~v (Y2) = ~v (Y,).
Hence, using formula (2.35) for ~bv, we have
(2.40)
H2c2
1+
Finally, if the offshore side of the control surface is in deep water and the nearshore side is in a water depth d, we have
2kd ] 2 H 2 tanh (kd) 1 + sinh (2kd) sin a  H o sin ao,
(2.41)
where, of course, H and k are wave height and wave n u m b e r on water depth d.
2.5.2
Given that (i) Rxx and Ryx are constant with respect to x, for a fixed y; (ii) Fyx is zero (because of the ideal flow assumption, and because the bottom slope is zero along the xaxis); (2.22a) is reduced to
(y2) = (yl)
H22 1 +
sinh(2kd)2
l in 2cos 2
Ryx, yields
(2kd)l I sin a l cos a l .
If the plane y  y~ of the control surface is in deep water and the plane y  Yz is in a water depth d, we have H2
1 + s i n h ( 2 k d ) s i n a c o s a  H Z s i n a 0 c o s a 0 .
(2.42)
56
Chapter 2
2.5.3 Solution for angle a and height H on given water depth d The two equations (2.41) and (2.42) enable us to obtain the two unknowns, that is to say H and a. From (2.41) we get the expression for H 2 and use it in (2.42). After these two operations, we obtain cos a = cos a0 tanh (kd) = cos a0 C/Co (2.43)
that is the Snell law of refraction which here has been reobtained within fluid mechanics. Such an equation enables us to obtain angle a on water depth d, once angle a0 on deep water is known (bear in mind that, if the wave travels landward on deep water, it travels landward also on shallow water, and vice versa; so that a and a0 belong to the same quadrant). Referring to the basic case in which the wave travels landward, angles a0 and a range between 0 and rr, and thus sin ao  v/1 sin a  v/1 that is, for (2.43), sin a  V/1  tanh 2 (kd) C O S 20g 0 . (2.44)
 cos 20g0,
cos 2 og,
At this stage, with cos a and sin a being known, we can operate on either (2.41) or (2.42) to obtain H. The result is sinh (2kd) tanh (kd)[sinh (2kd) + 2kd]
H  Ho
(2.45)
This equation enables us to get wave height H on water depth d, once height H0 and angle a0 on deep water are known. 2.5.4 Application o f the linear m o m e n t u m equation (ycomponent) Given that both Ryy, Rxy, and <)~y > [the mean force exerted by the seabed per unit length of contour lines] are constant with respect to x, (2.22b) reduces itself to
(2.46)
Equation (2.46) can be satisfied only if the water depth undergoes some variations of order H 2, which means that, under the wave motion, the water depth becomes d + A (d being the depth of still water) with A O ( H 2) depending on d. With these variations of the water depth, we have
I y2
Yl
pg(d + A) ~y dy  ~
dd
pg(d22
d21) q pg
l "d2
dl
Add,
57
pgH, 2 [.],,
pg S
2
[']2,
2kd
sinh(2kd)
(1 + sin20z) + sin2a I .
2 [']2 16
d '   ~ dd' 
dA'
1 16 H~ sin2ao,
(2.47)
where A' denotes the variation of the mean water level on water depth d'. It is convenient to express wave height H and angle a on water depth d in terms of H0 and a0 on deep water. Doing so, we rewrite (2.47) in the form
J
defining
,l
16
1 H2 F2 (kd)
0
(2.48)
F2 (kd) 
sinh (2kd)
tanh (kd)[sinh (2kd) + 2kd]
l  cs2a
1  tanh 2 (kd)cos2ao
2kd
sinh (2kd) (2.49)
[2  tanh 2 (kd) cos2cto] + 1  tanh 2 (kd)cos2cto}  sin2ao. Differentiating both sides of (2.48) with respect to d, we obtain
dA
dd
1 1
d 16
H ~ ~d F2 (k d ) ,
(2.50)
d(A/Ho) d(d/Lo)
I1 
58
Chapter 2
where t62 (kd) is the derivative of F2 (kd) with respect to kd, which is automatically deducible from (2.49). Equation (2.51) gives the derivative of A/Ho as a function of d/Lo. Hence, the function A/Ho can be obtained by numerical integration. Clearly, we get A/Ho less a constant, and this constant is then obtained from the principle of conservation of mass in the whole basin. For the step from (2.50) to (2.51), use the chain rule: d F2 (kd)= d(djd+ k) t62 (kd) dd and obtain the formula for
dk/dd from
a function of d/Lo [equation (2.45)] for c~0 = 7r/2, that is for the wave direction on deep water being orthogonal to the contour lines. In this case the wave direction keeps orthogonal to the contour lines at any depth. Indeed we can readily verify by means of (2.43) that c~ is equal to 7r/2 whichever the d, if c~0  7r/2. We shall call shoaling curve the graph of H/Ho as a function of d/Lo, for c~0 = 7r/2. This function has a minimum of 0.91 for d/Lo of about 0.15; it gradually approaches 1 for increasing d/Lo; and it should tend to infinity as d/Lo approaches zero. We use the conditional mood ("it should tend") since, as we shall see in the next section, the wave cannot survive on a water depth smaller than a critical threshold.
//o
ao=90
0.91
d/Lo
i i i i
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
Fig. 2.8 Shoaling: variation of the wave height with the water depth if the wave direction is orthogonal to the contour lines. [Obtained by means of equation (2.45).]
59
If the wave direction on deep water m a k e s an angle c~0 # 7r/2 with the contour lines, then c~ a p p r o a c h e s 7r/2 as the water depth decreases. I n d e e d from (2.43) we deduce that the smaller ]cosc~ I is than Icos(c~0)i, the smaller is d/Lo. In other words, whichever the wave direction on deep water, the wave direction on shallow w a t e r tends to b e c o m e o r t h o g o n a l to the shoreline. T h e variation of the wave direction on shallow w a t e r is called wave refraction, and it can be easily f o r e s e e n by m e a n s of (2.43) [see fig. 2.9 for a numerical example].
Y x
d/Lo
/62 o /~2
0
0.10 0.20
0.30 0.40
0.50 d/Lo
/& . i'o
Fig. 2.9 Refraction" variation of the wave direction from deep water to shoreline. [Obtained by m e a n s of e q u a t i o n (2.43).]
W e shall call shoalingrefraction curves the graphs of H/Ho vs d/Lo for the general cases of c~0 (: 7r/2. Two examples are given in fig. 2.10. W e see that, for a fixed d/Lo, the larger 17r/2c~0[ is, the smaller is H/Ho. I n d e e d from (2.45) it follows that H/Ho ~ 0 as c~0 + 0 or c~0 ~ 7r for any fixed d/Lo. S o m e t i m e s we h a p p e n to see some high waves far off the coast and the sea nearly calm n e a r the beach. Usually, this p h e n o m e n o n is just due to the fact that H/Ho gets very small on shallow w a t e r since c~0 is close to 0 or 7r (0 or 7r, according to w h e t h e r the wave attack is from the right side or from the left side). Indeed, in these cases we see the wave direction on deep w a t e r is nearly parallel to the coastline. 2.6.2 Where the wave breaks W h e n the ratio b e t w e e n the wave height and the w a t e r depth exceeds a critical threshold, the wave breaks. H e r e we shall assume 0.8 as a typical value for this critical ratio. A too large ratio b e t w e e n the wave height and the w a t e r depth is not the only cause of wave breaking. A n o t h e r possible cause is the excess of wave steepness:
60
Chapter 2
//o
(or %=135*)
0.84 0.45
a o=170")
dlLo
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
Fig. 2.10 Shoalingrefraction: variation of the wave height with the water depth for two distinct wave directions on deep water. [Obtained by means of equation (2.45).]
the wave breaks if the ratio H/L exceeds a critical threshold. Here, following Miche (1944) we shall assume this threshold to be equal to 0.14 tanh (kd). In summary, the two breaking conditions are
i st 2 nd
0.8
Ho
HolLo Lo'
=
(2.53a) (2.53b)
2 nd
No
d
Ho/Lo
0"14
0 . 1 4 tanh 2(kd).
It follows that the wave is stable, that is, it does not break, if
Ho
H <Min~
0"8
))
(2.54)
where the symbol Min (a, b) stands for "the smaller of a or b". For a given HolLo, the r.h.s, of (2.54) is a function of d/Lo we shall call the limit of stability. The breaking depth db is that for which the shoalingrefraction curve intersects the limit of stability. The limit of stability consists of two branches" branch A (the one on the smaller d/Lo) is given by (2.53a), and branch B is given by (2.53b). If the shoalingrefraction curve intersects branch A, the breaking occurs because the wave height is
61
too large with respect to the water depth. While, if the shoalingrefraction curve intersects branch B, the wave breaking occurs because the wave steepness is too large. A case of wave breaking due to an excessively large H/d is shown in fig. 2.11, and a case of wave breaking due to an excessive wave steepness is shown in fig. 2.12. Of course, the solutions we have obtained in the limit as H + 0 for fixed d and T lead to the worst predictions near the breaking depth. However, the prediction for what concerns shoaling and refraction proves to be rather effective up to the breaker line. 2.6.3
The setdown
The two figures 2.11 and 2.12 show also the variation A o f t h e mean water level. We see A is negative and its absolute value grows as the water depth decreases. In other words, the mean water level goes down from deep to shallow water. The lowering is rather small (please note that the scale factor of A/Ho in figs 2.11 and 2.12 is ten times smaller than the scale factor of H/Ho). The graph of A/Ho has been truncated at the breaking depth, since after the wave breaks the flow substantially changes and A starts growing, as we shall see in sect. 3.2. Thus the lowering at the breaking depth proves to be the largest one, and its absolute value is called setdown (SD). As to the calculation, A/Ho is obtained, less a constant, by numerical integration of (2.51). Then the principle of conservation of mass enables us to obtain the constant as well. Indeed, for this principle, the lowering of the mean water level on shallow water must be counterbalanced by an increase on deep water. However, the
extentoftheseaondeepwater(d/Lo>2) issolargethatevenaverylowincrease
is sufficient to compensate for the lowering on shallow water. In concrete terms, this
/
d/Lo+ oc
d/Lo> 1 ) c a n
Z,/
Let us go on assuming the contour lines to be parallel to the xaxis, and let us deal with the mass transport due to the wave motion. The mean rate of flow per unit length through a vertical plane orthogonal to the yaxis is
Q <
d
vydz > ,
Qw  <
I 'rl
0
vvdz>,
(2.55a) (2.55b)
62
2 H
B ~ ~limit
of stability eq.(2.54)
/
0
/ >""~ ~ ~"JIb/Ho=0.943
shoalingrefraction eq.(2.45)
d/Lo
I
t
0 A
(\somo=o.o4o
dlLo
'
0.5
Fig. 2.11 Solution to the problem of the breaking depth. Here the wave breaks because the ratio between wave height and water depth is too large.
_ _ H no
21
A,X/B / _____~~
Ho/LoO.12 , ao=90
eq.(2.54)
limit of stability
B~
shoalingrefraction eq.(2.45)
~Hb/Ho0.918 d/Lo
i i
A no
0.1
'
'
d/Lo
0.5
Fig. 2.12 Solution to the problem of the breaking depth. Here the wave breaks because the ratio between wave height and wavelength is too large.
63
where Qw is known, while Q~ is unknown since < v" > = C sin c~, (2.56)
C being the still unknown constant in the formula (2.26b) for the velocity potential. Qw is due to the horizontal particle displacement of the wave motion (hence the subscript w which stands for wave). Really in sect. 1.6.2 we have seen that, in half a wave period, a water particle is subject to a positive horizontal displacement Do of order H, and in the following half period it is subject to a compensating negative horizontal displacement  D o . But if we expand the solution as far as the second order, we find that the sum of the positive horizontal displacement and the negative horizontal displacement is no longer 0, and indeed it is equal to a positive term of order H 2. In other words, the water particle moves forward along the wave direction, and the connected discharge per unit length is equal to Q~. As to Qc, it is the flow rate per unit length of a steady current (hence the subscript c which stands for current) which is necessary to ensure the conservation of mass. 2.7.2 In front of a coast In the case of a coast, that is the case of fig. 2.7, the mean flow rate Q must be zero on any water depth (otherwise, we would have a progressive increase or decrease of the water mass nearshore). Accordingly, we have the situation depicted in fig. 2.13a: the wave motion produces a mass transport (average discharge Q~) towards the surf zone where a steady seaward current originates, whose flow rate Q~ is the opposite of Q,,,. Analytically:
Qc=Q~,
]
< vy >     g   a # l k
d 8
,,
H 2
since.
Since we are able to calculate H and c~ on any fixed water depth d once H0 and c~0 are given, the last equation enables us to get < Vy" > and (at last!) the constant C of the velocity potential (C being related to < Vv" > by 2.56). 2.7.3 In a strait connecting two seas Let us now deal with a strait connecting two seas, we assume the strait to be a
/
straight channel of constant width, passing from deep water (d/Lo > 1 )
\ ,,/
to shallow
water, and once again to deep water. In this case the wave motion produces a mass transport from one sea to the other, and only a local current arises on shallow water [cf. fig. 2.13b]. This current is necessary to ensure the conservation of mass,
64
Chapter 2
breaking
(a)
(b)
Fig. 2.13 (a) Before a coast: the average discharge Qw of the wave motion is counterbalanced by a steady current seaward. (b) In a channel with a saddle: the variation of the average discharge Qw, along the longitudinal axis, is counterbalanced by some steady currents near the saddle.
given that Q~ varies along the channel axis because of the changes in wave height and wavelength. Specifically, Qc on w a t e r d e p t h d must c o u n t e r b a l a n c e the difference b e t w e e n Q~ of d e e p w a t e r and Q~ of depth d:
Qc=QwoQw,
that is
<
0
vydz >
deep water
<
0
vydz>
water depth d
(2.57)
H~
T
H2
8
60 1
T h e constant C of the velocity potential is t h e n o b t a i n e d thanks to (2.56). On examining figures 2.13ab, one should bear in mind that the major portion of Qw is near the water surface, while Qc is the flow rate of a uniform current (indeed we know < vy" > is constant with respect to z). One should also bear in mind that the vertical flow connected with the variations of Qw and Qc along the yaxis gives rise to negligible vertical velocities, of order H 2 tanA, with tanA being very small because of the assumption of a gentle slope.
65
(0Cq) + ~0q d
dq
dt _ _ 0___c dt,
Oq
(2.58)
where a and c denote respectively the angle of the wavefront and the propagation speed at point P [see fig. 2.14]. Since
d s  cdt,
(2.58) is rewritten as
da ds
1 Oc c Oq
Here it is convenient to express Oc/Oq in terms of the derivatives Oc/Ox and Oc/Oy (x and y being as usual the fixed axes). Since q0~ dq  ~
Oc
OC (  d q y
Oc
da dq~ d s P
Fig. 2.14 dot. Refraction: the short stretch dq of wave crest, covering the distance ds, rotates through
66
it follows that
Chapter 2
dc~ ds
1 c
Oc sinc~ ~ c o s Oy
(2.59)
As we shall see later, equation (2.59) enables us to get the wave orthogonal, that is the curve whose tangent vector gives the local wave direction. Specifically, given the wave direction on deep water and the wave period, we can obtain the wave orthogonal passing at any fixed point P. 2.8.2 A more convenient form of the differential equation Applying the chain rule, we rewrite (2.59) in the form
d~ ds
1 c
dc Od sinc~ dd Ox 2k
dd Oy
cos
Hence, obtaining the formula for dc/dd from (1.28) of L, we arrive at dc~ ds sinh (2kd) + 2kd
c~)
(2.60)
which is more suitable for the finite difference technique. To appreciate the effectiveness of (2.60) one should simply try to calculate dc~/ds with the finite difference technique at any node i, j (coordinates: xi, yj) of a grid (Ax, Ay), for a flat bottom such that
Od  const, Oy
With equation (2.59) one finds
Od =0. Ox
COSOLij ,
d(__d~s )i _ _
j
2 k ij
d i, j + 1 
2Ay
d i, j_ 1
COSOlij
(2kd)i j
Here it can be easily verified that (i) the value obtained by means of (2.59) is approximate because c is not a linear function of d; (ii) the value obtained by means of (2.60) is exact.
67
For an arbitrary bottom, the use of (2.60) with the finite difference technique leads to only one error which is due to the fact that generally d is not a linear function of x and/or y. While, the use of (2.59) leads to two errors: the first one because d is not a linear function of x and/or y, and the second one because c is not a linear function of d. 2.8.3
ds
1
ds + o(ds),
x(s + ds)
x(s)
dx ds ~
ds
2 ds 2
d2x ds 2 + o(ds 2)
dy = sin oL, ds
d2y
ds 2   c o s ct
and consequently _
 s i n oz   , ds
dc~
dc~
ds
Substituting these expressions of dx/ds, dy/ds, d2x/ds 2 and d 2 y / d s 2 in equations (2.61abc), and resorting to the finite difference technique we obtain
(, + A , ) = ~ (,) +
x (~ + A ~ ) = x (~) + c o s ~ A ~ 
dog As, ds

(2.62a)
(2.62b) (2.62c)
1 y (s + A s ) = y (s) + sin c~ A s +   c o s o~
dc~ As 2"
ds
In conclusion, given the angle c~0 and an origin o r t h o g o n a l is calculated with finite increments As derivative dc~/ds in these equations is given by (2.60), Od/Ox and Od/Oy in (2.60) are evaluated by means of the 2.8.4
on deep water, the wave through (2.62abc). The and the partial derivatives finite difference technique.
Let us consider the contour lines of fig. 2.15. The water depth is symmetrical with respect to the yaxis, that is:
d (  x , y) = d (x, y).
68
Chapter 2
Therefore, it suffices to indicate the form of d (x, y) only for x > 0. Referring to the symbols of the figure we have shoreline [ y  R sin/3  x/R 2  x 2 if x _< R cos/3, [ y0 if x _> R cos/3. As to the water depth: if y < R sin/3  x tan/3,
d(x,y)
where
 a~ R s i n 3  y tan/3
y) 
'
if y > R s i n / 3  x t a n / 3 ,
(2.63)
Preliminarily, obtain the formulae for Od/Oxand Od/Oyfrom (2.63). Then these formulae will be used to compute da/ds by means of (2.60). Take R = 600m, fl = 30 , T = 10s, and a0 = 90 . Then assume a value of the increment As(As = 10m ~ L0/15 is small enough). Finally, to obtain a wave orthogonal, fix a point x0, Y0 of this orthogonal on deep water. Three sequences are dealt with: a.,x~,andy,, for n  0,1, 2, ...
Each n is associated with a new point of the orthogonal: x~, y, are the coordinates of this point, and an is the angle that the orthogonal makes with the xaxis at this point. The three sequences proceed straightforwardly from equations (2.62abc)"
OZn+lOZn+ (d~s)AS,
n
1 2 csa"
As2"
da Procedure. First, by means of (2.60), compute (d~s)0, that is ~ at point x0, Y0. ds Then, compute al , Xl, and yl . Then compute ( d~s ) , that is da at point so on. 1 ds
Xl,
Yl, and
The derivatives Od/Oxand Od/Oyprove to be discontinuous at the dashed lines (see fig. 2.15a), and consequently also the curvature of the wave orthogonal is discontinuous at these lines. A set of wave orthogonals for the given input data is shown in fig. 2.15b, and a new set for a0 = 45 is shown in fig. 2.15c.
69
//"
//Y'07"..
R /
a"
(a)
.. ""
/
/ /
R=600m //=30
tg2  0 05
///
i.q\ \
/,
..
~ \
a0=90o, T=10s
.'" ly".
/ / / / / .." ",. / /
Cc)
V
/ /
Fig. 2.15 (a) Contour lines before a promontory. (b) and (c) Wave refraction diagrams for two distinct wave directions on deep water. [Obtained by means of equations (2.60) and (2.62abc).]
2.8.5 The relation between the wave height and the distance between two
orthogonals
Let us consider a control volume whose horizontal section is b o u n d e d by two adjacent wave orthogonals ((~ and (~ in fig. 2.16) and two short stretches of wavefront ((~ and O in fig. 2.16). Equation (2.19), for this control volume, yields
fblbl~obo =0,
70
Chapter 2
b 1
Fig. 2.16 If the contour lines are not straight, the control volume from deep to shallow water is b o u n d e d by two wave orthogonals and two short stretches of wavefront.
where b0 and ba are the widths of the two stretches of wavefront and ~b0 and ~bl are the norms of ~. Hence, with the formula (2.36) for ~b, we obtain sinh (2kd) ~/b0 tanh(kd) [sinh(Zkd) + 2kd] b~'
H  H0
where d, H and k are water depth, wave height and wave number at O), and H0 is the wave height at @ on deep water. Clearly, this result requires bl to be small enough, for the wave height to be nearly constant on the stretch of wavefront.
Fig. 2.17a shows a wave flume of constant depth. Let us assume the wavemaker is switched on at time t  0. We wonder: how much time is needed for the waves to get to a fixed point at a distance yo from the wavemaker. We call to this time. To answer the question, we take a control volume extending from y = 0 (wavemaker) to y  Yo. In the time interval 0 < t < to, the flow in the control volume is not periodic. Indeed, if we took some photographs at a regular time interval T (equal to the wave period) we would catch an evolving situation. Initially, we would see some waves close to the wavemaker with the rest of the tank being still calm. Then, we would see the wave zone widens gradually. As said above, this means the flow is not periodic and, consequently, equation (2.19) is not valid. On the contrary, equation (2.18) retains its validity, since it holds whether or not the flow is periodic. Integrating (2.18) with respect to t on the interval (0, to), we obtain
(p + pe) v . n d A dt 
[I
pe d W
][J
t=0
pe d W
w
(2.64)
t=to
71
,t
o
plan
J I
I
!
. .
longitudinal section
i
Yo (c) DCB A
(/,)
r
~c.,..,
Ir77r17r17r17rlrT:
L J/LJ J_LJ_LLJ J_L J_DJ~"
time: t
:
y.
EDCB
~rlrrlri1FTiFrl~
~
.,....~ ,~ .
time: t+T
y.
F
time: t +2T
y
DCB
l  l  r  r l T r l  r r l T r 1Trr~
Fig. 2.17 (a) Plan view and longitudinal section of a long wave flume. (b) Three pictures taken a wave period from each other, while the wave motion advances on an initially still basin (the waves are sketched as vertical segments). (c) Details of the group's head.
[(p +
pe)(vy)]y= o dz
dt.
(2.65)
A s s u m i n g that
to is
1.h.s. of (2.64) 
tob
pe)(vy)]y=odz
>
tob(fby)y=o.
(2.66)
72
Chapter 2
From which, using formula (2.35) for ~by, we arrive at the final form 1.h.s. of ( 2 . 6 4 )   t o b 81p g H 2 ~zc I 1 + sink2kd l(2kd) .
D e v e l o p m e n t o f the r.h.s, o f (2.64)
The r.h.s, of (2.64) represents the difference between the energy being present in the control volume at time t = 0 when the water is still calm, and the energy at time t = to when the waves occupy the whole control volume. Therefore, we can write r.h.s, of (2.64) =  b y o ~, and, using the formula (2.37) for g~; r.h.s, of ( 2 . 6 4 )   b y o
Solution 8 p g H 2 .
(2.67)
(2.68)
c 2
1+
sink (2kd)
2.9.2 C o m m e n t
o n the m a t h e m a t i c a l
solution
As said, equation (2.66) calls for to to be very large with respect to the wave period; and similarly equation (2.67) calls for Yo to be very large with respect to the wavelength. As to (2.67), we also point out that ~ i s not only the wave energy per unit surface, averaged over a wave period, but it is also the wave energy per unit surface, averaged over a wavelength at a fixed time instant. This second meaning has been applied when obtaining (2.67). In simple words, the assumption leading to (2.66) and (2.67) is the same one that we use if we write sin2x d x  Xo ~
0 710
sin2x dx,
which of course is exact if Xo is equal to nTr (with n an arbitrary integer), but it becomes exact as Xo + oc even if Xo is not equal to nTr. The assumption of a very large to has been made implicitly also in another step of our reasoning. Specifically, it was made when we assumed the water at y = Yo to be calm till to, and from to forth a wave of height H to occur at this location. In fact, at yo, the water will be calm till an instant to'; then for two or three wave periods an unsteady flow will take place, with the wave height gradually increasing; then, from an instant to' forth, the wave height will take on its final value H. But, if to is very
73
large with respect to T, the duration of the transient gets very small with respect to to, and thus it can be neglected as we have done.
2.9.3
Equation (2.68) reveals that the propagation speed of a wave motion on a calm basin is cc  ~
c[
1 + sinh ( 2 k d )
2kd]
(2.69)
(this being the quotient yo/to). H e r e it can be readily verified that cc is generally smaller than c, and on deep water (the case illustrated by fig. 2.17) cc is half the c. Let us see the reason for this. Fig. 2.17b shows three instant pictures of the wave flume taken an interval T from each other. The waves are sketched as vertical segments: the height of the segment is equal to the wave height and the interval between two consecutive segments is equal to the wavelength. Each single wave advances by a wavelength L in a wave period T, so that its propagation speed is LIT [see the detail of the group's head in fig. 2.17c]. It is not so for the wave group which advances by a wavelength in two wave periods, so that its propagation speed is c/2. The propagation speed of the group is smaller than the propagation speed of each single wave, simply because each single wave goes to die at the group head. In particular, in the first picture, wave A is going to die; then in the third picture, two periods later, wave B is going to die; then it will be the turn of C, D and so on. [Of course the envelope front in fig. 2.17 has been somewhat simplified. For a more detailed representation see Miles (1962).] It will be u n d e r s t o o d that subscript G is for group, and that cc is the group celerity which plays a crucial role in the mechanics of the wind g e n e r a t e d waves. Indeed, we shall see in chapter 10 that the w i n d  g e n e r a t e d waves give rise to groups consisting of three or four waves, which travel with the celerity co. We shall see that in this case the waves are born at the group's tail, grow to a m a x i m u m height while reaching the envelope centre, and then go to die at the group's head. Such a p h e n o m e n o n occurs because co, the p r o p a g a t i o n speed of the envelope, is smaller than the celerity c of each single wave. The difference between spontaneous wave groups forming in the sea storms and the group of the periodic waves is great. It suffices to note that the group of the periodic waves, unlike the sea wave groups, grows longer and longer and its waves are already grown up at birth. Indeed, the periodic waves are to the wind generated waves as a simple animal species is to the human species. But, clearly the study of the elementary species is very helpful to understand the more sophisticated species. In particular we shall see that the quotient cc/c for the sea wave groups is the same as for the elementary group of periodic waves.
74
Chapter 2
u  Q/d
2g
Q
//2
(2.70)
d  uZ/2g
ud
with
+ ( 02
Q*  v ~ d d .
(2.71)
Equality (2.71) admits two positive solutions for ud/Q, provided that
(2.72)
These are well known concepts from hydraulics. Clearly, here we are interested only in the first solution, that is in the smaller value of ud/Q satisfying (2.71). (In
75
this connection, note that the second solution implies tt + 0 as Q ~ 0.) Therefore, we must seek the lowest positive x for which the two functions
f (x)  x ,
f2 (X) 1 ~ X 3
are equal to each other. This particular x coincides with the sought value of u d / Q . In the following section we shall deal with the problem of wave shoaling on a current. In preparation for this analysis it is useful to do a couple of preliminary exercises.
First exercise: verify the linear m o m e n t u m equation for a control volume between two arbitrary ends y~ and y2 [see fig. 2.18]. What we have to do is to evaluate < ~y > and Ryy, and verify whether or not equality (2.46) is fulfilled. Having assumed that the bottom slope approaches zero, the pressure distribution approaches the static form, so that we have < fyy > ~
pg[l ~y dy dl
pgcldd,
(2.73)
Ryy 
l'
 pgz + puZdz.
(2.74)
And, with these formulae for < f~y > and Ryy, equation (2.46) yields
pgcldd ~ 
/s=~
i
"~
u2

i I i 
] i
:
i Y~_ ' i' i Y PLAN
:
, Yl
Fig. 2.18 Reference scheme for a steady current on a channel of varying depth. The bottom slope is assumed to approach zero.
76
Chapter 2
d2
S dddl
This equality can be proved numerically. To this end, you should fix two water depths dl and d2 and a discharge Q satisfying inequality (2.72) for each d in (da, d2), and you should evaluate S by means of (2.70) and (2.71).
Second exercise: verify the energy equation for a control volume between two arbitrary ends yl and y2. What we have to do is to verify whether or not equality (2.40) is fulfilled. In this case (current alone) (2.40) implies that  p g z + p g(z  S1) + ~ u
jo {
~1
1 ~]}
Ul dZ 
jo {
4
pgz + p
[g
where the 1.h.s. is ~by on water depth d~, and the r.h.s, is ~by on water depth d2. The equality (2.75) is actually fulfilled since the two integrands are zero, which can be readily proved with the use of definition (2.70) of S. It should be noted that the origin of the zaxis at each of the two ends of the control volume has been taken at the level of the free surface. In doing so, one is able to express the pressure simply as  p g z both at yl and at y2. But, pay attention: the potential energy must be expressed with one fixed reference level. That is why the potential energy per unit volume is p g ( z  $1) at y~, and p g ( z  $2) at Y2; the fixed level being that of the free surface on infinite water depth. 2.10.2 E f f e c t s o f a v a r i a t i o n o f the m e a n w a t e r level o n the linear m o m e n t u m equation The presence of waves on the current causes a variation A of the mean water level. Such a variation will be of order H 2 will depend on d and will be zero on infinite depth. For these statements we refer to what we have shown in sect. 2.5.4 for waves without current. The variation A of the mean water level yields some variations of order H 2 of < j)y > and Ryy. Specifically, the mean force exerted by the seabed changes from that given by (2.73) to
< fly > Pg yl (d+A) ~ dd dy  pg < ([t + A) dd,
jy2
j.d2
dl
Add,
Periodic wave pattern: the control volume approach that is, in a form more suitable for the next developments,
77
dl
,t~
_
d dA dd + pg(d2 A2 dd
dial).
(2.76)
Ryy 
d
d
which ensures the constancy of the discharge. And with this au, the variation of the radiation stress proves to be
6R~y = p g ( d  3S)A.
(2.78)
2.10.3 Effects o f a variation o f the m e a n water level on the energy equation Because of the variation of the mean water level, ~y becomes
(Dyd
1 ,
] ]
6fbv ti
pg(zA)+pg(zS)+~p(u+Su) 
.fo[
d
_ pgz+pg(zS)+~pu
,]
2 (u+6u)dz+
2 udz.
Hence, using (2.77) of 6u and neglecting the terms of orders smaller than H 2, we obtain
6cbv= p g ( Q  2Su)A.
2.10.4 Particle velocities and pressure fluctuations in waves on currents
(2.79)
We need to know wave pressure and particle velocity due to the wave motion, exact to the first order. We need also to know the mean values of such wave pressure and particle velocity (only the horizontal component), exact to the second order. We shall call v~y the horizontal particle velocity due to the wave motion, to distinguish it from Vy which is the actual horizontal particle velocity (being due to waves and current). As for the expressions of Ap, Vwy, and vz exact to the first order, they
78
Chapter 2
straightforwardly proceed from the velocity potential (1.45) (bearing in mind that the water depth here is d): H cosh [kc (d + z)] cos (kcy Ap tog~ 2 cosh (kcd)
cot) + o ( H ) ,
(2.80a)
(2.80b)
(2.80c)
As for < A p > exact to the second order, we reason as we did in sect. 2.4.6 on the small control volume of fig. 2.6, the result being that
< Ap > to < v2 z >
tog2 H2  ~ ( c o  ukc) 2 2 sinh 2 [kc (d + z)] + 0 ( 8 2 ) . kc cosh 2 (kcd)
Finally, as for < Vwy > exact to the second order, we reason as we did in sect. 2.7.3 for obtaining equation (2.57), the result being that
1 1.2rr H2o < Vwy>~
g~
.2
In concrete terms, a nonzero < Vwy > is necessary to compensate the variation of the mass transport of the waves from deep to shallow water. To verify the formula (2.80a) use the Bernoulli equation (1.5) with the formula (1.45) for the velocity potential. Ap will prove to be the sum of two terms: the first one obtained from 2 addition of these two terms and simplification.
2 . Equation (2.80a) will proceed from p&~/Ot, the second one obtained from p(Och/Oy) 1
equation
79
a<h, > = 0 ,
since < &p > is zero at the b o t t o m depth.
(2.81)
Effects on Ryy
Ryy for the current alone is given by (2.74). With the waves on the current, becomes
Ryy
Rvy =
so that the variation is
1
T
r
o d
g)Ryy T
JJ
Hence, using the formulae of sect. 2.10.4 and neglecting the terms of orders smaller than H : , we arrive at
7r bl ] + pg ~ H2o . 2 gT cosh2(kcd)
kcd 
(2.82)
2.10.6 Effects o f the w a v e m o t i o n on the energy e q u a t i o n In sect. 2.10.3 we have evaluated how the terms of the energy e q u a t i o n change due to a variation A of the m e a n water level. Now, let us consider how they change due to the wave motion. The m e a n energy flux of a wave on a current on water depth d is
~v  f o d
{  p g z + A p + pg (z  S) + ~1 p
p + pu v~y + 1 v2
so that the variation with respect to the ~by of the current alone is
~ey T
0 d
2 p wy AI ~ pV
80
Chapter 2
Hence, using the formulae of sect. 2.10.4 and neglecting the terms of orders smaller than H 2, we arrive at
5~)y pgH 2
1
+T2 g
{1
g(a~ ukc)2ukc
(aJ
.
cosh 2 (kccl)
.
kcd
+ ukc) ~]+ 1 ~ 7r S H~ . ~ uj + pg 2 T
(2.83)
ukc) l[l+ukc(~
.
2.10.7 is:
The system of equations of the mean water level and wave height
~) < fly > + ~)Ryy (y~) = ~)Ryy (Y2),
a qSy(yl) = 5~by (y2).
The variations 5 < ])y >, 5Ryy and 5 4~y must satisfy equations (2.40) and (2.46), that (2.84a) (2.84b)
Each of these variations consists of two parts, the first one being due to the change in the m e a n water level and the second one being due to the wave motion. These variations have been obtained in sects. 2.10.26, and their formulae have been gathered in table 2.1 for the reader's convenience. If we take yl on infinite water depth, where u, S and A are zero, and y2 on any given depth d, equations (2.84ab) give rise to
J~ d'
d
cosh 2 (k~d)
kc~l 
(Q2Su)A+H2{~6g(a~ukc)2ukc
kcd
cosh:
1 } ~ ~ 7rsU2o T
(kcd)
ukc)_l.
(2.85b)
where A is the variation of the m e a n water level on water depth d, and A' is the variation of the mean water level on water depth d'. The two u n k n o w n functions in equations (2.85ab) are A(d) and H (d). The wave n u m b e r kc  27r/Lc proceeds from (1.46) with d as the water depth. As to d, S and u, they are functions of d, which can be specified once the discharge Q per unit length is given [cf. sect. 2.10.1]. The novelty with respect to the waves without current will not have passed unnoticed. Without the current, the energy equation in the twodimensional flow contains the only unknown H, and the linear m o m e n t u m equation contains the two unknowns H and A. Therefore, we obtain H from the energy equation and then we
Periodic wave pattern: the control volume approach T a b l e 2.1 S u m m a r y o f the variations o f <jSy>, Ryy and ~b v
VARIATION DUE TO EQUATION EXPRESSION
81
2.76
pg
dl
d2
d dA dd + pg (d2 A dd
dial)
Vwy , VZ , /4k p
2.81
2.78 8Ryy
Vwy ,
pg(a
,og H 2 ~6 ~ g ( co
1
3S)A
u k~ )  2 kc
kcd
c o s h 2 (kcc1).
v~, Ap
2.82
7c bl 2 + Pg 2 gT Ho
2.79
pg(Q
2Su)A
ukc) 2 ukc
kccl
cosh 2 (kcd)
8 cbv
Vwy,v:, Ap 2.83 1
+5~ g
[1
ukc)' rc s H 2
ukc)
+ s. + PgT
">
s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d l y o b t a i n A f r o m the linear m o m e n t u m e q u a t i o n . W h e r e a s , with the current, we h a v e got a system of two e q u a t i o n s in the two u n k n o w n s H 2 and A. The step from (2.84ab) to (2.85ab) should be done in three stages. First stage:
6Ryy(yl) and 6~b,,(y~) are substituted by the expressions of table 2.1 with d = d l , H = H1, S  &, u = Ul, A  A ~ ; ~Rvy(y:) and 8~b,.(y:) are substituted by the expressions of table 2.1 with d  d2, H = H:, S  $2, u = u2, A=A2; 6< f t:v> is copied as it is from table 2.1. Second stage: a simplification can be done, in particular all terms with d~A1 and d2A2 can
be cancelled. Third stage: yl is taken on infinite water depth so that A1+ 0, Ul+ 0, S~ ~ 0 , H~+H0, and y: is taken on water depth d so that A : = A , u : = u , S : = S , H2 = H . As an exercise, verify that, for u  0 , equations (2.85a) and (2.85b) are reduced respectively to (2.47) and (2.45) with a = a0 = 7v/2. To this end, you should bear in mind that kcd ~ kd as u + 0. Then, to reobtain (2.45) and (2.47) exactly, you should make a few formal steps like multiplying and dividing by sinh (kd).
82
Chapter 2
2.10.8 Solution to the system o f equations The second equation of system (2.85ab) is of the type
H 2
= A +BA,
(2.86) B 
where
A
[g Hg 1   co ~
T 1/
}l/
'
[2s  e l / { }
{'}{~6g(aJukc)Zukc
[1 + ukc (co ukc) 1 ]
11 ~
1)
U
kcd + 1 g 2kcd + sinh (2kcd) (co ukc) 1. cosh 2 (kcd) cosh: (kcd)
.
i
with CH: t 7r u H:0 16 2 g r '
o~d' dA'
~
dd'  C +
D H 2 Jr EA,
D
1 + 1 16 ffg(coukc)Zkc
If we multiply all terms of the first equation by D and add the result to the second equation, we obtain
(2.87)
where
F=_C+AD,
G=_BD+E.
Now our system consists of equation (2.86) of the two unknowns H 2 and A, and equation (2.87) of A alone. The terms A, B, F, and G in these equations are functions of d. To solve (2.87), let us consider a sequence of growing depths d l , d2, ..., d N , with d~ = d. Then, from (2.87) we have
J di d' dA'
de1 dd'
dd'=
where Fi, Gi are for F, G on water depth di. Provided that the difference di sufficiently small, the integral on the 1.h.s. of this equation is equal to
is
Periodic wave pattern: the control volume approach so that the equation yields
83
(2.88)
which is the solution to the problem. Indeed, provided that du is sufficiently large, we a s s u m e A N = 0 and, by means of (2.88), we can obtain ANl, ANZ, and so on, up to the sought A on water depth d. Then, once A is known, we obtain also H by means of (2.86). The next section shows the details of this procedure. 2.10.9 S u m m a r y and example o f calculation The input data are H0, T, and Q. The goal is to obtain the wave height H and the variation A of the mean water level on a given water depth d (d being the depth of the still water). Preliminarily, check if condition (2.72) is fulfilled: the absolute value of the given flow rate Q per unit length must be smaller than
3v/~
x/~gdd
otherwise the problem does not admit a solution. Then fix a sequence of growing depths dl, d2,..., du with d l  d. We suggest taking d i  d ~ _ ~  costant _< d/20, and dN > 20d. Then execute the following operations for each d/. (i) Compute the velocity ui of the current, by means of (2.71). You have to seek the lowest positive x satisfying the equality xl+
( ~ ; ) 2 x 3, with
*__ ~ gdi di . Q~
Ui  Z Xi"
(ii) Evaluate Si and di"
u2
Si ___ i 2g'
d i  d i  Si.
(iii) By means of (1.47) evaluate the wavelength L cs. You have to seek the lowest positive x satisfying the equality x tanh(27rx)  a i ( x  b i) 2 , with
ai
cli / Lo \ c 0 / '
b'Lol Co
(ui)
84
Chapter 2
x !i, is equal
to
di/Lci, so that
di / x t i
Zci 
If the current is negative, x'i might not exist. In that case the wave is not able to travel against the stream. (iv) Evaluate the wave number
Bi  [2Siui  Q]/{'}i ,
U i kci) 1.
1 }
'
Fi
D i~6
2
kci~ti
, Ei
3Si,
=~ C i
..ql_ Ai Di,
At this stage, assume AN = 0 and compute AN1 through (2.88). Hence, go on with equation (2.88) and compute ANZ, AN3, and so on, up to A1 which is the sought A on the given water depth d. Finally, use (2.86) to obtain wave height H on the given water depth d: H = v/A1 } B1 A1. You should check the result, assuming a smaller value of the step di  di_l and a greater value of du, and then repeat the procedure. The convergence is quick and, generally, the suggested values of d i  dg_l and dN prove to be suitable. The procedure entails no serious difficulty. Fig. 2.19 shows the result of a calculation for H0  5 m , T = 10s.
The figure shows wave height H and variation A of the mean water level on d = 15 m versus the discharge of the current. As we can see, if the current is positive the wave height is smaller than if the current is null ( Q  0). Conversely, if the current is negative, the wave height grows. These are some intuitive phenomena, that now we can predict by means of the solution exact to the order H 2.
85
The two functions H(Q) and A (Q) are cut off on the left side, on the discharge of the critical negative current (against which the wave cannot run). We see that near this critical discharge, the wave height grows quickly. In addition to this, the wavelength gets smaller (cf. sect. 1.9.2), so that we realize that the wave gets very steep and breaks. Indeed, the dashed piece of curve indicates the range where the wave exceeds the critical steepness. On the right side the two functions are cut off at Q = Qmax (the maximum discharge for the fixed water depth) which is 99 m 3 s]/m for the water depth of 15 m. As to the wave setdown, we see that it is larger than in absence of the current.
Conclusive note
The problem of shoaling was originally solved by Burnside (1915). The radiation stress tensor was introduced by LonguetHiggins and Stewart (1960, 1961), and the existence and size of the setdown were predicted by these authors (1962). The current associated with the wave motion was predicted by W h i t h a m (1962). The numerical calculation of the wave orthogonals by means of (2.59) probably started with Griswold (1963). The solution which is commonly used for the shoaling and setdown of waves on current was given by Jonsson et al. (1970). This solution is of order H2; the effects of the higher order terms were then considered by Jonsson and A r n e b o r g (1995), and also the effects of the velocity distribution with depth were considered by Jonsson et al. (1978). Jonsson et al. (1970) concluded that the conservative
15 Him]
~..j~t
:
d15m Ho=5m
T=lOs
I0
~ g
I00
50
50
t~n~s'~a] 100
86
Chapter 2
equations are not applicable for direct calculations. T h e r e f o r e they p r o p o s e d a set of "practical equations". T h e new a p p r o a c h of sect. 2.10, taking into account all terms of o r d e r H 2 due to the wave m o t i o n or the variation of the m e a n water level, yields the formal solution, exact to the o r d e r H 2, based on the conservative equations. This solution is easily applicable for direct calculations as shown in sect. 2.10.9. A c o m p a r i s o n with the solution b a s e d on the practical equations of J o n s s o n et al. (1970) reveals some discrepancy only for what concerns the variation of the m e a n water level (see fig. 2.19). This discrepancy b e c o m e s significant only for large positive Q where the exact solution predicts a wave setdown (increasing quickly as Q a p p r o a c h e s Qmax) w h e r e a s the solution based on the practical equations predicts a small wave setup.
References
Burnside W., 1915 On the modification of a train of waves as it advances into shallow water. Proc. L o n d o n Math. Soc. 14, 131133. Griswold G. M., 1963 Numerical calculation of wave refraction. J. Geophys. Res. 68, 17151723. Jonsson I. G., Skougaard C. and Wang J. D., 1970 Interaction between waves and currents. Proc. 12 th Conf. Coastal Eng. A S C E , 489507. Jonsson I. G., BrinkKiaer O. and Thomas G.P., 1978 Wave action and setdown for waves on a shear current. J. Fluid Mech. 87, 401416. Jonsson I. G. and Arneborg L., 1995 Energy properties and shoaling of higherorder Stokes waves on a current. Ocean Eng. 22, 819857. LonguetHiggins M. S. and Stewart R. W., 1960 Changes in the form of short gravity waves on long waves and tidal currents. J. Fluid Mech. 8, 565583; 1961 The changes in amplitude of short gravity waves on steady, nonuniform currents. J. Fluid Mech. 10, 529549; 1962 Radiation stress and mass transport in the gravity waves. J. Fluid Mech. 13,481504. Miche R., 1944 Mouvements ondulatoire de lamer en profondeur constante ou d6croissante. Annales Ponts et Chausses, 2578, 131164, 270292, 369406. Miles J. W., 1962 Transient gravity wave response to an oscillating pressure. J. Fluid Mech. 13, 145150. Whitham G. B., 1962 Mass, momentum and energy flux in water waves. J. Fluid Mech. 12, 135147.
87
3.1 The control volume from the breaker line to the beach
The control volume of fig. 3.1 extends from the breaker line to the beach. It is bounded by a vertical plane at the breaker line and by two vertical planes piercing the shoreline. Let us assume that (i) the flow is ideal up to the breaker line, (ii) the contour lines are xparallel. From the linear m o m e n t u m equation for this control volume we have < Fsx > 
Xl
Yh
(3.1a)
where (i) the subscript b denotes breaking; (ii) T is the shear stress on vertical planes parallel to the yaxis, from the breaker line to the beach;
Ii 1
i
.......
[~]
x~
x2 \\breaking
_m___~
Yl,
88
Chapter 3
(iii) the yupper limit of the integrals is oc since the control volume extends well over the shoreline. Of course, the contribution to these integrals is different from zero only up to the extreme y where the water arrives on the beach. The novelty of (3.1ab) with respect to (2.22ab) consists in the shear stress Ty due to the realfluid flow within the surf zone. The expressions of the radiation stresses obtained in sect. 2.4 retain their validity only up to the breaker line. Luckily, the symmetry of the problem (straight contour lines) implies that even in the surf zone, that is for y > Yb, R, < T > and < fl > (the mean force per unit length of shoreline) are constant with respect to x. Therefore equations (3.1ab) reduce themselves to
<g
Note, as the contour lines are xparallel, fix is a shear force and is nonzero because of the realfluid flow. Bearing in mind that the water depth at breaking is db  SD, from (2.29) of Ryx and (2.33) of Ryy we obtain the equations
< f# > 
(3.2a)
(3.2b)
Given that Ryx keeps constant from deep water to the breaker line, < 05x > can also be expressed in the alternative forms
1 pgH2 [1 + sinh 2kd 1 < fix >   16 (2kd) sin a cos c~,
where H and c~ are wave height and angle on any fixed water depth d, and
(3.3)
(3.4)
Let us assume that (i) the seabed is flat and makes an angle A with the horizontal, (ii) the ycomponent of the average shear stress exerted by the seabed is null. The assumption (ii) is commonly done [cf. LonguetHiggins (1971)] for the so called spilling breaker. The usual pattern given of this breaker type is: starting from the
89
breaker line the ratio between the wave height and the water depth keeps constant. (We shall see shortly when this breaker type takes place.) U n d e r assumptions (i) and (ii), we have < )~v > 21 pgd2b_ tanApg < A W > , (3.5)
where p < A W > is the mean variation of the water mass per unit length of the volume of fig. 3.1. Equating the righthand sides of (3.2b) and (3.5) we obtain
<
cot {
b sinh(2kbdb)
The < A W > can be expressed also in terms of setup Sv [which is the superelevation of the point of intersection between the mean water surface and the shore]. Referring to fig. 3.2, we have
1 < Aw>~(db  SD)(dh +
1 2 Su) cotA  fd bcotA.
The last two equalities yield (1 + sin 2ab) 4 sin 2at, , (3.6)
Hh  db/Lo
Lo 14o
8 \~o J ~
sinh(2kbdb)
where all terms of the r.h.s, can be obtained through the procedure of sect. 2.6, for given values of Ho/Lo and c~0. In the spilling breaker the setup coincides with the runup (Rv) that is the highest level where the water arrives on the beach (the wave fades away till its height becomes zero). Therefore equation (3.6) gives also the runup of the spilling breaker. ~ "
T
Fig. 3.2 The setup (Su) is the superelevation of the point of intersection between the mean water level and the shore. In the spilling breaker type the setup coincides with the runup (Ru).
90
Chapter 3
Using (3.6) we have obtained fig. 3.3 which shows the quotient Rv/Hb as a function of Hb/Lo for the case of an orthogonal wave attack (a0 = 7r/2). The figure shows a basic property: the larger the steepness of the wave, the smaller the runup. For the rest, we see that the runup ranges roughly between 0.1Hb and 0.3Hb. This is a small runup peculiar to the spilling breaker. A greater runup takes place with the new type of breaker which we will deal with in the next section.
0.3
R _ _ _ ~ u
0.05
Hb / Lo 0.10
Fig. 3.3 Spilling breaker type" quotient Rv/Hb a s a function of Hb/Lo for an orthogonal attack ( a 0  7r/2). For obtaining this function: fix Ho/Lo, compute db/Lo, Hb/Ho and SD/Ho [by means of the equations of sect. 2.6] and then use (3.6).
3.2.2
The spilling breaker [fig. 3.4a] occurs if the distance from the breaker line to the shore is large with respect to the wavelength (we shall see shortly how large). Otherwise the wave overturns and produces a plunging breaker [fig. 3.4b], which is a phenomenon with some striking features. Peregrine et al. (1980) found that the water rising up the front of the wave into the jet is subject to accelerations well greater than g! As we have already pointed out, in the spilling breaker there is always some water beyond the shoreline. In the plunging breaker, the water withdraws from the
Ca)
(b)
~.: i:
Fig. 3.4
91
shoreline during the wave cycle. This rundown is then counterbalanced by a runup larger than in the spilling breaker. The prediction of the breaker type is usually done from the value of .~_= tan A / v/Hb / L0 called Irribarren's number, which is related to the quotient ]ybt/Lb:
"~
(Hh/db)27v / Lb "
[To prove this, use the relation Lb ~ v/2rcLodb which is exact as db/Lo +0.] Hence, the greater lyhl/Lb is, the smaller is .~ That is: spilling breaker # large lybl/Lb e:> small .~; plunging breaker , small lYh]/Lb :> large J . To judge from the work of Battjes (1974) the spilling breaker should occur for .~ < 0.2 that, with the characteristic ratio H~/d~, = 0.8, is equivalent to ]y~l/Lb > 2 + 2.5. In the range of the plunging breaker, Rv/Hb grows generally with .7. Looking at the data of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (1984), we see that Rv/Hb is rather close to .7, for .Y smaller than some threshold which depends on the bottom slope. In particular
Rv/Hb ~.~
for
.Y< 0.7
and
tanA = 0.10.
For .Y exceeding this threshold, the rate of grow of Rv/Hh gets smaller and smaller. The basic matter is thus confirmed also by the plunging breaker: the larger the wave steepness, the smaller the runup. An interesting example of this is sometimes visible from the long beach which stretches from Cape Spartivento (eastern side) to Cape dell'Armi (western side) at the extreme south of the Italian peninsula (see fig. 4.14). We happen to see the waves approaching the beach from the righthand side (southwest) and the foam rushing up the beach from the lefthand side. The waves from the righthand side are generated by a local wind blowing from Sicily. The runup is due to the swells from the southeast which are less steep than the wind waves from the southwest. Under roughly the same wave height, the eye is caught by the steeper waves and usually the swells are not noticed. The presence of the swells is only revealed by the runup because the runup is greater if the wave steepness is smaller. 3.2.3 Other breaker types Spilling and plunging are the more common breaker types of the wind waves on natural beaches. For very large values of J , say ,~ in excess of about 3, some new breaker types (collapsing or surging) occur. A tsunami (see sect. 14.1) can produce a huge runup. If the greater water depths only are considered, tsunami's runup should be typically nearly equal to Ilk. If we
92
Chapter 3
include the shallow flooding, this runup can be even much greater than Hb (see Camfield, 1980). A laboratory runup of about 1.7 Hb (including the shallow flooding) on a beach with a slope of 1/20 is described in detail by Lin et al. (1999).
<Lx>=and hence it is given by any of the three expressions (3.2a), (3.3) and (3.4) multiplied by  1. The immersed weight P* (per unit length) of the mobile sand is related to the shear force < fax > by P*  < fax > / ~ , where # is the coefficient of friction between the mobile sand and the beach. P* is then related to the cross section A of the mobile layer by
P* = (%  ",/a)( 1  ~') A ,
where 7s is the specific weight of the sand and ~ is the sediment porosity. The bulk longshore sediment transport rate is
Q, = A v , ,
where v, is a mean longshore sand velocity, which is expressed as
Vs  K* V/gdb ,
with K* being dependent on the size of the sand. The last four equations taken together yield
Qs  K ! %
with the following definitions ~ g ~
v#gdb,
(3.7)
(Ts/'~a 
K 1)(1 ~)
'
(3.8)
KK*/#.
A typical value for K suggested by Komar and Inman (1970) is 0.77. The scatter of this factor has been dealt with by Bodge and Kraus (1991). With the formulae for < J}x >, that is with (3.2a), or (3.3) or (3.4), formula (3.7) for Q, becomes ~H 2 2 k b d b ] sin (2ab)v/gdb  1 K b I1 + (3.9a) Q' 32 sinh(2kbdb) '
93
Q'
32
1 / ~ H 2 [1 t
2kd 1
(3.9b)
(where H and c~ are wave height and angle on any fixed depth d), or
Q_
32
1 ~H2osin(2c~o) x//gdb.
(3.9c)
3.3.2 The equation o f sediment conservation So far, we have dealt with xparallel contour lines. Now let us examine the case of a coast with generally curved contour lines. We shall call ~ the offshore distance of the shoreline. ~ is parallel to the yaxis, but it has the opposite direction: y is landward oriented, ~ is seaward o r i e n t e d . Generally, the beach profile is assumed to slide along a horizontal base located at a closure depth dc~. Referring to fig. 3.5, we have (dct+B)(~t d0dx
OQ, dx dt. Ox
The 1.h.s. of this equation gives the variation in the small time dt of the volume of sediment in a stretch of coast of length dx. The r.h.s, gives the difference between the volume of sediment entering and the volume leaving the stretch of coast of length dx in the small time interval dt. Clearly, some terms of this equation cancel out and it can be rewritten in the form
O~ Ot
1 OQ, d ct + B Ox
(3.10)
Y
B /::: :
. . . . . . . . . . . . I I ! ..: , ,
O~dt d~= N
_
I I
0Qs dx Ox
,,
I
[~7 breaking /
I_ _ _ [ ~ ~ ax ~
I i i
94
Chapter 3
0~
+0
'
(3.11)
and in addition it is assumed that (i) the water depth at breaking is constant along the xaxis and equal to db; (ii) the wave height at breaking is constant and equal to Hb; (iii) the angle between the direction of wave advance and the xaxis, at breaking, is constant and equal to c~b; (iv) the contour lines, at any given crosssection, are straight and parallel to a tangent vector to the shoreline; where db, Hb and c~b are, respectively, the water depth, the wave height and the wave angle at breaking in the case o f xparallel c o n t o u r lines. Under these assumptions, the bulk sediment transport rate can be evaluated by means of (3.9a), with c~b + O~/Ox as the angle between the direction of wave advance and the contour lines at breaking:
Q,(x)  K
32
H 2 [1+
2kbdb
OQs :
Ox
16
H2 1 +
sinh (2kbdb )
Ox 2 '
(3 12)
"
where we have used the assumption (3.11). From (3.10) and (3.12) we arrive at the equation describing the planform evolution of a shoreline 0~ = G 02~
Ot Ox 2 '
(3.13)
where
G _
~H2
16 dcl + B
[ 2kbdb ]cos(2c~b). 1+
sinh (2k bd b)
(3.14)
95
We shall see in sect. 3.9 that equation (3.13) can be solved analytically for given initial conditions. Equation (3.13) was obtained originally by PelnardConsidbre himself (1956) but the relation between longshore diffusivity G and wave characteristics was not fully specified. Also the relation (3.14), which is still accepted nowadays, is not yet exact. Indeed, if the shoreline is not straight at least a part of the contour lines will not be straight, and thus at breaking the water depth, the wave height and the angle with the xaxis will vary with x. It is true that these variations are infinitesimal thanks to assumption (3.11) on O~/Ox; but it is also true that, for the same assumption, OQ,/Ox is infinitesimal, and thus we cannot conclude that the effect of the aforesaid variations is negligible. On the contrary, we shall see this effect to be not negligible. Moreover the effect of the curvature of the contour lines can be neglected only under some precise assumptions on the higher order derivatives of ~ with respect to x.
3.5 P r o b l e m of b e a c h p l a n f o r m evolution: the case of c o n t o u r lines parallel up to d e e p water 3.5.1 A s s u m p t i o n s Typically, the contour lines have roughly the same shape as the shoreline. Therefore, we assume the offshore distance ~(a/of the contour line of depth d to be related to the offshore distance ~ of the shoreline by
(x) = Ay +
(x),
where Ay is constant along x and depends only on the fixed depth d of the contour 1 line. Let us call Ay0 the Ay of the contour line of depth do  ~ L 0 (deep water). Thus Ay0 is the distance between the contour line of depth do and the shoreline. In what follows we shall make the usual assumption (3.11) and in addition we shall assume that
lay01 Oxn+l
<<
Ox ~
for n = 1, 2, 3, ...,
(3.15)
where max denotes the maximum with respect to x. The assumptions (3.11) and (3.15) are fulfilled by a shoreline of the type ~(x)  a s i n ( 27r x + c ) , .... t,"Ay o (3.16)
provided that . 4 i s very large (a representing here the amplitude of the shoreline
96
Chapter 3
undulation). Of course, assumptions (3.11) and (3.15) are satisfied also if ~(x) is a sum of functions like (3.16): ~(x) ~
N aisin (
27r ~X qIA///Ay0
Ei ,
(3.17)
i=1
which is useful since we can represent a very large variety of planforms of the shoreline through series with the form (3.17). 3.5.2
Let us consider any crosssection of the beach, as an example crosssection (D in fig. 3.6. To obtain the bulk sediment transport rate we shall assume that the contour lines are straight and parallel to a tangent vector to the shoreline at this crosssection. In doing so, we shall make an error since the contour lines have a nonzero curvature. But, if condition (3.15) is fulfilled this error has some negligible consequences, as we shall see later. The direction of wave advance on deep water makes an angle c~0 with xaxis. Consequently, it makes an angle c~0 + 8c~0 with the local direction of the contour lines: 8C~o = 0~ .
Ox
(3.18)
The variation 8c~0 of the deep water angle between the direction of wave advance and the contour lines causes some variations in the breaking conditions. We shall have water depth at breaking = d b + 8db, wave height at breaking = Hb + 8Hb, angle between direction of wave advance and contour lines at breaking C~b + SCab, where db, Hb and C~b are the breaking characteristics if the contour lines are xparallel. Using (3.9a) we have
Qs _
Fig. 3.6 Contour lines with a small curvature. At any crosssection like Q, we assume the contour lines to be straight.
97
This formula is rather difficult to handle because ~Hb, 6db, and 8ab depend on O~/Ox in a complex way. Certainly, the formula that proceeds from (3.9c) is more simple" Q, _ 1_~/~H20 sin[2(a0 + 6ao)]v/g(d b + 6db). (3.19) 32 Indeed 6a0 is simply equal to O~/Ox, so that only 6db must be sought. What follows is devoted to this operation. 3.5.3 The variation 8db o f the water depth at breaking The problem is in the following terms. We know: if (i) the contour lines are straight, (ii) the wave period is T, (iii) the wave height on deep water is H0, (iv) the angle between the direction of wave advance on deep water and the contour lines is a0, then the water depth and the wave height at breaking are respectively dh and Hb. We wonder: how does it change the water depth at breaking if the direction of wave advance on deep water changes from a0 into a0 + 8a0? Assuming that the quotient between the wave height and the water depth at breaking is constant and equal to 0.8, we have
(3.20) (3.21)
6db  6Hh/0.8 .
To get 8Hb let us consider H(x~,x2, d) where x~ = wave height on deep water, x2  angle between the direction of wave advance on deep water and contour lines. H(x~,x2, d) gives the wave height as a function of water depth d and of wave characteristics x~ and x2 on deep water (for a fixed wave period T), under the assumption of straight contour lines. In terms of this function, we have
1 = H O , x 2 = (*l), d = d b
Od
1 = HO, x 2 = C~o, d = d b
6db  K, Ho6ao,
where K, =
1
H 0x2 1=Ho, x2 =ao,
d=db
(3.22)
(3.23)
0.8
98
Chapter 3
1 
(3.24a)
=Ho,x~~o,d=d~
Lo
$2
+B2
TI (S2 + B 2 )
TI (S2 + B2) 2
"
Equation (3.22) with (3.23) and (3.24ab) represent the solution to the problem of 8db. To prove the step from (3.20) to (3.21), bear in mind that
db
d~
8db.
Hence, the proof proceeds straightforwardly. 3.5.4 T h e relation b e t w e e n Q~ a n d O~/Ox Equations (3.18), (3.19) and (3.22) taken together yield
es 
Ox "
(3.25)
99
The framed term on the r.h.s, of this formula is the sediment transport rate for the case of xparallel contour lines. The additional term is the variation of the sediment transport rate due to the deviation of the shoreline planform from the xaxis. To prove the step from (3.19) to (3.25), use the relations sin[2(a0 + 6a0)]  sin(2a0) + 2 cos(2a0)6a0,
1 (g)' 28dh.
3.5.5 The equation of beach planform evolution Combining equations (3.10) and (3.25), we obtain a single equation describing the planform evolution of a shoreline" 0~ = G~ 0 2~
Ot Ox 2 '
(3.26)
We see that the exact equation has the same framework of the traditional (3.13), but the longshore diffusivity is markedly different. It suffices to note that G of the traditional equation is nearly always positive (usually ab is rather close to 7r/2, so that COS(2ab) is smaller than zero); while G~ of the exact solution can well be smaller than zero for a small a0. We shall see in sect. 3.7 that a negative G~ has a clear physical meaning. The consequence of the difference between the exact and the traditional solution should be already apparent: the fact that in a few cases the longshore diffusivity is negative rather than positive implies an opposite evolution of the beach planform, that is erosion instead of accretion or vice versa.
3.5.6 The effect of the curvature of the contour lines on the sediment transport Equation (3.25) of Q, has been obtained under the assumption that the contour lines at any fixed crosssection are straight. If we counted the effect of contour lines' curvature, the expression of Q, would include some additional terms in
0~ Ayo~x 2
and
Ay20 0 x 3 .
0~
100
Chapter 3
3.6 Problem of beach planform evolution: the case of contour lines parallel only within a certain distance from the shoreline
3.6.1
The original (unnourished) beach of fig. 3.7 consists of xparallel contour lines, with a b e r m at a depth d~ [see fig. 3.7]. A restoration program modifies the beach profile up to the berm. The new beach contour lines are parallel to the new shoreline [see again fig. 3.7]. Therefore, from offshore to coast, we find first the xparallel contour lines of the original topography, then the berm, and then the curved contour lines of the nourished beach.
.................
"~berm
sect. AA
d n ~.
~ '~"
sect. BB
Fig. 3.7 Our pattern of a nourished beach: the initially straight contour lines are modified up to depth dn because of the added sand.
Also in this case the evolution of the shoreline planform is analytically predictable. To this end, we r e m a k e assumptions (3.11) and (3.15) on the derivatives of the shoreline. Moreover, for getting the transport rate Q, we assume that the contour lines of the nourished beach at any fixed crosssection are straight. Doing so, that is neglecting the contour lines' curvature, we shall make a negligible error thanks to assumption (3.15).
3.6.2
On water depth d. the wave characteristics are the same that would be there without the nourishment; indeed, the original seabed topography with the xparallel contour lines still remains on water depths larger than d.. Hence, on water depth d., the wave height takes on a constant value H. and the direction of wave advance
101
makes a constant angle c~, with the xaxis; and H, and c~, are related to H0 and c~0 by equations (2.43) and (2.45) of shoalingrefraction: cosc~  cosc~0 tanh (k~d~), (3.28a) [ 1 _ cos____2oz0_ ]+, (3.28b)
where k, is the wave number on water depth d.. The sediment transport rate Q, at any fixed crossshore section is given by (3.9a) or by (3.9b) (this only for d <_ d,); equation (3.9c) is no longer valid because the contour lines are parallel to the shoreline only up to water depth d,. It is convenient to express Q, in the form (3.9b) with d  d~ because on water depth d, the wave height takes on the constant value H~ and the angle between the direction of wave advance and the contour lines of the nourished beach is c~ + ~c~, with
Ox'
(3.29)
where db +6db is the new water depth at breaking and db was the water depth at breaking when the contour lines were xparallel.
The reasoning is essentially the same as in sect. 3.5.3, with the only difference that ~)Hb n o w is the variation of the wave height at breaking for a variation 8c~ of the wave direction on depth d, and no variation of the wave height on depth d~. Retracing the steps of sect. 3.5.3 we arrive at
(3.30)
K2 = HO
0.8 
(3.31)
where ~.~ wave height on water depth d,, ~~angle between the direction of wave advance and the contour lines on water depth d,. H(x3, x4, d) gives the wave height as a function of water depth d and of wave characteristics x3 and x4 on water depth d, (for a fixed wave period T) under the
X3 X4
102
Chapter 3
assumption of straight contour lines. This function proceeds from the usual equations (2.43) and (2.45) of shoalingrefraction: { tanh(k.d.)[sinh(2k~d~) + 2k,,d~]sinh(2kd) }} H(x3, x4,d)  X3 tanh(kd)[sinh(2kd) + 2kd]sinh(2knd~) "
.{
1 _ C0S2X4
1  [tanh ( k d ) / t a n h (k. d.)] 2cos2x4
1 I ~ / ~ $2 ~0~ ,~~]1[ .
}1
"
(oH)~
ON4
= r.h.s, of (3.24b), where we have used (3.28ab) and the compact symbols
C1  cosh(kbdb), T1  tanh(kbdb), B2  2kbdb, $2  sinh(2kbdb),
C 2  cosh(2kbdb),
C O  cosc~0, T O  t a n h ( k n d n ) .
3.6.4 The e q u a t i o n o f p l a n f o r m e v o l u t i o n o f the n o u r i s h e d beach Bearing in mind that 8a,  O~/Ox, from (3.29) and (3.30) we obtain es _ 32 ~ sinh(2k~d~) sin(2c~)v@db + 2 c s ( 2 ~ ) ~
.
O~ + ~x
+ ~ sin (2c~)
~g
n 0K 2~
o~1
(3.32)
where
a2 = K n20 ~ b b l ~ 1  C02 32 dc~+ B To 1  TO 2 C O
2
[2(2T02C0 2  1) + K2 v/1
TO 2CO 2 TO CO ~b
~o~
"
(3.33)
103
Use (3.28ab) to check this expression of G2, and prove that it correctly coincides with the expression (3.27) of G1 for TO = 1. 3.7 P l a n f o r m evolution of a natural shoreline 3.7.1 Analysis o f the longshore diffusivity G~ Let us consider the longshore diffusivity G1 given by (3.27). G~ thought of as a function of c~0 proves to be symmetrical with respect to c~0 = 7r/2:
(2 +
(2
[In examining (3.27) of G~, bear in mind that K~ depends on sin (2c~0), so that G~ is the sum of a term depending on cos(2c~0) and of a term depending on sin 2 (2c~0).] Therefore we limit ourselves to analyse G~ on the domain 0<C~o < and, to make this analysis easier, we define
G1 71" ~ 2
G' 1 +
G 1" ,
where
c', 
/~ _ _ H 2 o 2 gv/~7]cos(2c~o), 32 dct+B
K 32
,, G 1  
.20
dct+B 2
K1 sin (2C~o).
Here K is positive. As to K~ [definition (3.23)], it is given by the product of a positive term and sin (2c~0). Therefore, it follows that <0 G1
t
7r 4'
0 >0
7r < c ~ 0 < 7r
2'
,,/<0 G~ 0
0<C~o< C~o71
7l
2 ~
The conclusion being that G~ is smaller than zero if 0 < c~0 < 7r/4, and is greater than zero if c~0 = 7r/2. Hence, given that G~ (c~0) is strictly increasing on [7r/4, 7r/2], it will exist rc
Og0crit
4'
Chapter 3
< 0 > 0
for for
(3.34)
3.7.2 Whether a foreland undergoes erosion or accretion G1 > 0 implies that a foreland is eroded, and, on the contrary, G1 < 0 implies that the foreland grows. This is a consequence of equation (3.26) and of the fact that O2~/Ox 2 of a foreland is negative. Therefore, basing ourselves on (3.34) we conclude the foreland's evolution will be: erosion if c~0 >OL0crit, accretion if
OZ0 ~ OZ0 crit
As discussed in sect. 3.5, the difference with respect to the traditional solution is remarkable. Indeed the longshore diffusivity G in the traditional equation (3.13) is nearly always positive because c~b is usually close to 7r/2 as a consequence of refraction. Hence, the traditional solution foresees that the foreland is eroded whatever the wave direction on deep water. 3.7.3 Why the foreland grows or is eroded according to whether the wave
105
(a)
~ao
(0)
Fig. 3.8 (a) A foreland attacked orthogonally is eroded because both Q,o and Q,o are directed outward. (b) If the foreland is subjected to an inclined attack, erosion will occur if Q,o is smaller than Qso, while accretion will occur if Q,o is greater than Q,o"
where G2 (7r/2, oc) is the value of G2 for the basic case of orthogonal wave attack
/ . , \
deep
nourishment
(d,/Lo>+).
,,, z./
This
quotient
has b e e n
represented in fig. 3.9 as a function of c~0, for a few different values of d~/Lo, and any fixed H0 and dct + B, and Ho/Lo = 0.05 (here note that the sensitivity of the graph to a variation of Ho/Lo is very small). 1 For d,/Lo > ~ , G2 tends to coincide with G~ and thus we see what was illustrated in sect. 3.7.1:G2 smaller than zero for c~0 within a C~0c~t.For d,/Lo smaller and smaller, the domain on which G2 is negative shrinks gradually, and in addition the largest positive value of G2 grows. 3.8.2
To understand the physical consequences of the analysis on G2, we must bear in mind equation (3.32) and fig. 3.10. This shows that 0 2 ~ / 0 x 2 is negative on the
106
._. 1.5
Chapter 3
1.5
tll,.~
6/Lo> o.5
(~ d./Lo=0.25
(~
o.,_
30
a
//
/i
6o
l
',
i
9o
~0~47
1.0
1.5
1.5
Fig. 3.9 The longshore diffusivity G2 as a function of the wave direction on deep water, for a few depths of the nourished beach. The nourished beach proves to be the more stable, the greater its depth is and the more inclined the waves are (bearing in mind that c~0 = ~ / 2 means orthogonal wave attack).
central part of the n o u r i s h e d beach while 0 2 ~/OX 2 is positive on the two sides. T h e r e f o r e , if G2 is greater than zero, the central part of the n o u r i s h e d beach is e r o d e d and the two sides grow. This means that the n o u r i s h e d beach melts, since the n o u r i s h e d material spreads over the coast. O n the contrary, if G2 is smaller than zero the central part of the n o u r i s h e d beach grows. The conclusion is that the d e e p e r the toe of the n o u r i s h e d beach, the slower the erosion is. U n d e r the same depth of the n o u r i s h e d beach, the erosion is stronger if the wave direction on deep water is o r t h o g o n a l to the general alignment of the shoreline. In the case of a deep n o u r i s h e d beach, the waves whose direction on deep water is very inclined with respect to the shoreline restore (rather than destroy) the n o u r i s h e d beach. Kamphuis et al. (1986) suggest that/ in formulae (3.9) for Q, is proportional to Hb/D (D being the grain size). With their expression for K, one can obtain the exact forms of G1 and G2, using the formal solutions for 5db given in sects. 3.5.3 and 3.6.3. As a result, you will find that the range on which G2 is smaller than zero gets larger than in fig. 3.9, which means smaller beach erosion.
,I I
c~~ >0
~c2~ ~>0
Fig. 3.10
107
3.8.3 Different degree of stability of a nourished beach according to its location U n d e r the same depth dn and wave characteristics on deep water, the nourished beach of fig. 3.11a on a long straight coast should be more stable than the nourished beach of fig. 3.11b between two promontories. Indeed the very inclined waves in case (b) c a n n o t reach the n o u r i s h e d beach that is sheltered by the two promontories.
dcl = dn
and we shall analyse the evolution of an initial shoreline planform.
108
Chapter 3
_lb<x<
2
. . .
0
if x <
lborx>lb 2 ' 2
.
1b
'
(x, t)
with
(3.35)
(3.36a)
1 (x
b)/
(3.36b)
where it is assumed that G2 > 0 and t > 0. Here one has simply to obtain the partial derivatives of function (3.35) and verify that these derivatives satisfy equation (3.32). To this end it needs only to recall the definition eft(w)
  ~
2Iwe u2
0
du.
(3.37)
0(3
from which it follows that, as t ~ O, ~ (x, t) approaches zero for any fixed x greater than b/2 or smaller than  b / 2 and approaches a for any fixed x between  b / 2 and b/2. Of course, ~ is a continuous function of x also as t ~ O, and indeed it goes gradually from 0 to a in a neighbourhood of order x ~ 2 t of x  b/2, and it goes gradually from a to 0 in a neighbourhood of order x ~ 2 t of x  b/2. In simple words: as t ~ O, (3.35) is the equation of a rectangle of base b and height a, with round corners.
109
Fig. 3.12 shows ~ (x) at a few time instants. Function ~, as we can easily verify from its expression (3.35), is always positive, for every x and t. M o r e o v e r the area between ~(x, t) (the shoreline of the nourished beach) and the xaxis (the original shoreline) keeps constant in time. Indeed
I
for every t.
+~ ~ (x, t) dx  ab,
(3.38)
OG
3.9.2 A solution f o r a m o r e realistic initial c o n d i t i o n Function (3.3536) with G in place of G2 is used [Dean (1992)] to foresee the planform evolution of a beach nourishment project (G being given a simplified form valid on shallow water). Really function (3.35) satisfies the differential equation, but fails to satisfy condition (3.11). Indeed, as t ~ 0, the derivative O~/Ox at x =  b / 2 and x = b/2, far from approaching zero, tends to infinity. To obviate this discrepancy, and also to get a more realistic initial condition, Walton (1994) has obtained the analytical solution for beach fills with tapers at the end. Alternatively, we can resort again to function (3.35), but with the following new forms of. ~/~1(x, t) a n d . ;~2(X, t):
..... ~I (x, t)
....i. (x, t)
,( T x 
'I~ +
~ G 2 to + G2 t,
(3.39a1
9,,
where it is assumed that G2 > 0 and t _> 0. With these forms of .#~(x,t) and ,,~2(x, t), the initial planform of the shoreline is the one that originally (i.e. with formulae 3.36ab f o r , "/~l a n d . J/~2) occurred at instant to. The value of to will be defined after a few attempts, so to fit the initial design planform of the nourished beach. In summary, we shall have to fix two parameters: to, and a or b (bearing in mind that a . b is the total area of the gained beach, which obviously is a design input).
I b I
X,
110
Chapter 3
3.9.3 The solution valid for unsteady wave conditions Solution (3.35) with ~ 1 , u~J2 given by (3.39ab) enables us to foresee the beach planform evolution provided that the waves keep constant in time, so that G2 also keeps constant. Let us now allow the possibility that the wave height and direction are not constant in time. In this case, G2 is no longer a constant, that is we have a Gz(t) in place of the constant G2. Nevertheless, function (3.35) satisfies the differential equation (3.32) provided that ~ 1 (x + b ) / ~ (x, t)  ~const +
1 (x  b ) / ~ $ 2 (x, t)  ~
const +
I: I;
G2 (t') dt',
G2(t') dt',
where const is a positive constant and G2 may be positive or negative. Naturally, the constant const (whose dimension is square length) will be obtained after a few attempts, so that the initial condition fits the design planform of the nourished beach. Also in this case the parameters to be determined are only two, i.e. const and a or b, given that a. b is the known area of the gained beach. If t G2 ( t ' ) dt' > 0,
we shall have something like fig. 3.13a: erosion of the nourished beach. On the contrary, if IIG2 ( t ' ) dt' < 0,
we shall have something like fig. 3.13b: accretion of the nourished beach.
Ca)
(b)
X,
X.
Fig. 3.13 (a) The integral of Gz(t) is positive: erosion of the nourished beach. (b) The integral of G2(t) is negative: accretion of the nourished beach.
111
Example: planform evolution of the nourished beach under unsteady wave conditions
Let us imagine that a n o u r i s h e d beach is subjected to one h u n d r e d hours of waves with given H0 and L0, and c~0 equal to 70; s u b s e q u e n t l y it is subjected to one h u n d r e d hours of waves with the same H0 and L0, and c~0 equal to 20 . Let us 1 assume also that d,,/Lo >_~. As we see from fig. 3.9, the G2 of c~0  20 is nearly opposite to the G2 of c~0 = 70 . H e n c e
Ii G2(t') dt'
is zero for t = 200 hours, and c o n s e q u e n t l y the offshore distance ~ (x) after the two h u n d r e d hours is u n c h a n g e d with respect to the initial shoreline. Note, fig. 3.9 is based on the assumption of constant H0 and L0, and hence it is suitable for the aim of this example. Whereas, for comparing the G2 of two wave trains with different values of H0 a n d / o r L0, one has to resort to equation (3.33).
Since Q, d e p e n d s on < f~ > and on gx/~h, O~/Ot d e p e n d s on the longshore variations of < f,x > and v@db. H e r e we shall prove that the basic d e p e n d e n c e is on < f~x > . To achieve this we shall restart the t r e a t m e n t from the beginning, using the following simplified forms of Q, and O~/Ot:
Q, ~
(3.40a) (3.40b)
Ot
const
OQ, , Ox
w h e r e H and c~ are the wave height and the angle of the direction of wave advance on an a r b i t r a r y w a t e r d e p t h d (provided that the c o n t o u r lines are parallel to each other within this w a t e r depth).
112
Chapter 3
Let us now consider the idealized configuration of a nourished beach described in sect. 3.6.1 and fig. 3.7. In this case, it is convenient to apply (3.41) with d = d,, since the wave height on water depth d, takes on the constant value H , , and the angle between the direction of wave advance and the beach contour lines is equal to a~ + O ( / O x with a n constant. Therefore
Qs ~
"
Then with (3.28ab) relating H . , c~. to H0, c~0, it follows that Q~  const H0  ~
,,,,a 2 1
1
1  CO 2 TO 2 CO 2
+ 2 (2 T O 2 C O 2
1)
'
where TO stands for tanh(k,d~) and CO for cosc~0. Finally, with this formula for Qs and equation (3.40b) of 0~
Ot
O~/Ot,
we arrive at (3.42)
02~ ~ G2 0X 2
'
approximate
G2) is given by
*_
constH 0~
2 1 ~/
i 
1CO 2
TOzCO 2
(2T02C02 1) .
1.5
1.5
(~ dn/Lo>0.5 (~dn/Lo=0.25 (~ ~
"~ 1.0
0.5
,0 ~
0.5
,//
1.0
10
1.5
1.5
Fig. 3.14 The longshore diffusivity obtained by means of the simplified equations (3.40ab). The exact form is given in fig. 3.9.
113
The approximate longshore diffusivity G 2 is shown in fig. 3.14 as a function of c~0 and d~/Lo. We see that it reproposes all the essential features of the exact solution that was given in fig. 3.9. In particular G 2, like G2, is greater than zero only for c~0 greater than a threshold O~0cri t which is nearly the same for G 2 and G2. Moreover G 2, like G2, grows as d,,/Lo decreases. Thus, even from the approximate solution, we arrive at the two essential concepts: the waves nearly orthogonal to the shoreline destroy the nourishment, while the very inclined waves restore the nourishment; the demolition gets less intense and the restoration gets more intense as the depth of the nourished beach grows. Conclusion: the simplified forms (3.40ab) are effective to understand the main trend of the beach planform evolution; and, thanks to these simplified forms, also the prediction of the beach planform evolution caused by coastal structures gets easier, as we shall see in the following section.
structures
In order to predict the beach planform evolution caused by a structure we shall model the beach as an ideal absorber which does not alter the wave motion in front of it. It does not reflect nor transmit energy. The absorber is located at the original shoreline (xaxis) as is shown in figs. 3.15 and 3.17 which illustrate, respectively, the case of a groin and of a detached breakwater. Let us consider any small control volume of width 5x such as the one of fig. 3.15b. Let us compare this control volume with the same control volume without the absorber [cf. fig. 3.15c]. The difference, for what concerns the xcomponent of the linear m o m e n t u m equation, is that in the control volume of fig. 3.15b there is the force < ff:~(x)> 5x exerted by the absorber while in the control volume of fig. 3.15c there is the effiux of linear m o m e n t u m Rvx(x, 0) 5x. The other terms are the same in the two control volumes, given that the ideal absorber does not alter the wave motion before it. Therefore, the xcomponent of the linear m o m e n t u m equation for the control volume of fig. 3.15b is equal to the xcomponent of the linear m o m e n t u m equation for the control volume of fig. 3.15c, apart from two differences: the presence on the 1.h.s. of the force exerted by the absorber; and the absence on the r.h.s, of the linear m o m e n t u m effiux from the upper xparallel side of the control volume. Since both the small control volumes, the one of fig. 3.15b and the one of fig. 3.15c, must satisfy the linear m o m e n t u m equation, it follows that
114
Chapter 3
const
OR~ (x, O)
(3.43)
(a)
(b)
Y~
(c)
&
i i LJ
incident
wave direction
T g~fx,O)
~'vative /~/derivative
/ min~
(e)
~ : .
~ I~ e~~
i
. ~,: ,,'~"
original shoreline
.: ,:, ~. .............
.h~o
Fig. 3.15 (a) Groin. (b) Beach thought of as an ideal absorber. (c) Absorber removed: comparing (c) to (b) we realize that < ])x(X) > = Ryx(X, 0). (d) Function Ryx(X, 0). (e) Evolution trend of the shoreline planform obtained by means of (3.43). The Ryx of the diffracted waves was contributed by P. Filianoti.
115
where, as said, const is a positive constant. The derivative O~/Ot gives the evolution trend: if O~/Ot is positive the dry beach grows; if O~/Ot is negative the dry beach gets narrower; the larger the absolute value of O~/Ot, the larger is the deformation of the dry beach. Equation (3.43) is a general tool to predict the evolution trend of a beach in consequence of the building of some coastal structure. One has to estimate the Ry~ at the original shoreline (assumed to coincide with the xaxis), as if the beach was not there. Then the evolution trend is simply given by the opposite of the derivative ORy~/Ox. To a first approximation, one assumes a constant water depth (the mean water depth within the shoreline and the groin's tip or detached breakwater). As for the radiation stress Rye, it can be obtained analytically for a few configurations of basic interest (we shall see two examples in the next section). With this approach, we can estimate the diffraction effect which is the principal responsible for the beach deformation near coastal structures. 3.11.2 The cases of a groin and of a detached breakwater
Groin
For the case of the groin (fig. 3.15), we obtain Ry~ from the formula (1.59b) for the velocity potential of the waves interacting with a semiinfinite reflecting wall (the groin). In (1.59b), ~ is given in terms of the polar coordinates r,/3. Thus we must resort to the conversion rules OOdx_
Ox
00 ( _ d x s i n / 3 ) + 0 O
Or
~
(_dxcos/3)
'
(3.44a)
(3.44b)
which have been written in the coarse form (without cancelling dx and dy) in order to make easier their verification by means of fig. 3.16. Fig. 3.15d shows Ryx(x, 0), and fig. 3.15e shows the evolution trend of the beach. Ryx is zero at the groin where v~ is zero. The derivative ORy~/Ox has its negative maximum at the wave beaten side of the groin, and its positive maximum at a certain distance from the lee side. Therefore the maximum beach accretion is at the wave beaten side of the groin, and the maximum erosion at a certain distance from the lee side. Note, in equation (1.59) 0 is the angle between the orthogonal to the wall and the direction of wave advance. Accordingly, in fig. 3.15, 0 denotes the angle between the orthogonal to the groin and the direction of wave advance. Note also that the Ryx(x,O) shown in the figure has been obtained through the more realistic theory of the wind waves (chap. 8) with a characteristic directional spectrum and an inclined dominant direction. Resorting to the periodic wave pattern, one would find a sequence of local maxima and minima of Ryx(x,0) for x > 0. As a consequence, the disturbance of the groin would affect the shoreline for a great distance.
116
Chapter 3
= 
In the case of the detached breakwater (fig. 3.17), the radiation stress Ry, approaches zero as Ix] tends to infinity, since we have assumed the wave attack to be orthogonal to the original shoreline. Moreover, for symmetry, Ryx is zero at x = 0 (breakwater centre). Before x = 0, Ryx has a local maximum since the wave diffracted by the left tip of the breakwater attacks the beach from the left side. On the contrary, after x  0, Ryx has a minimum (negative maximum) because the wave diffracted by the right tip of the breakwater attacks the beach from the right side. The aforesaid local maximum and minimum of Ry, are located roughly opposite the two tips of the detached breakwater. Thus, in the strip between these two tips, ORyx/Ox is smaller than zero, which results in beach accretion. Outside this strip, ORy,/Ox is greater than zero, which results in beach erosion.
Conclusive note
Detached breakwater
The solution for the setup is due to the works of LonguetHiggins and Stewart (1963 and 1964) and of Bowen et al. (1968). The solution for the longshore sediment transport is due to the works of LonguetHiggins (19701971) and Komar and Inman (1970). As previously said, the traditional solution for the evolution of a beach planform is due to PelnardConsidbre (1956). Dean and Yoo (1992), Work and Dean (1995), and Work and Rogers (1997) pointed out that the longshore variation in the wave direction and height modifies the rate of evolution of a nourished beach, and they gave some improved solutions. However, these solutions are still approximate in that some terms being linearly dependent on c9~/0x are neglected or assumed to be constant. The solutions given in sects. 3.58 are novelties. They are exact as c9~/cgx+ 0 under the assumption of sect. 3.5.1, at the initial time instant (the solution for the ideal nourished beach is exact whatever the time instant, provided
d~ = dd).
The pattern of sect. 3.11, based on the radiation stress tensor of the diffracted waves, is a new proposal. Indeed, so far the equation (3.13), which is valid if the
Wave effects on coasts beach deformation is due to wave or detached breakwaters, where diffraction. For example, Larson different values of G" one for the shoreline.
117
TY ~tv.I', II U
! I
absorber
,,rc~
~ ~
II II k3
i ! i i
max.
derivative
/~x,0>
min. derivative
I I I I I I I I I
(a)
I . I.....
I I I
(e)
~ ~ ~ o r e l i n e
Fig. 3.17 (a) Detached breakwater. (b), (c), (d), (e) [see caption of fig. 3.15].
118
Chapter 3
References
Battjes J. A., 1974 Computation of setup, longshore currents, runup and overtopping due to windgenerated waves. Dept. Civil Eng. Delft Univ. of Technology, Report 74. Bodge K.R. and Kraus N.C., 1991 Critical examination of longshore sediment transport rate magnitude. Proc. Coastal Sediments '91 ASCE, 139155. Bowen A. J., Inman D. L. and Simmons V. P., 1968 Wave setdown and wave setup. J. Geophys. Res. 73, 25692577. Camfield F.E., 1980 Tsunami engineering. U.S. Army, Coastal Engineering Research Center, Report 6, 1222. Dean R.G., 1992 Beach nourishment: Design Principles. Proc. Short Course attached to the 23 rd Conf. Coastal Eng., 301349. Dean R.G. and Yoo C.H., 1992 Beachnourishment performance predictions. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng. 118, 567586. Kamphuis J.W., Davies M.H., Nairn R.B. and Sayao O.J., 1986 Calculation of littoral sand transport rate. Coastal Eng. 10, 121. Kana T.W. and Mohan R.K., 1998 Analysis of nourished profile stability following the fifth Hunting Island (SC) beach nourishment project, Coastal Eng. 33, 117136. Komar P. D. and Inman D. L., 1970 Longshore sand transport on the beaches. J. Geophys. Res. 75, 59145927. Larson M., Hanson H. and Kraus N.C., 1997 Analytical solutions of oneline model for shoreline change near coastal structures. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng. 123, 180191. Lin P., Chang K.A. and Liu P.L.F., 1999 Runup and rundown of solitary waves on sloping beaches. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng. 125, 247255. LonguetHiggins M. S., 1970 Longshore currents generated by oblique incident waves, 1. J. Geophys. Res. 75, 67786789; 1971 Recent progress in the study of longshore currents, in Waves on beaches and resulting sediment transport, Academic Press, New York. LonguetHiggins M. S. and Stewart R. W., 1963 A note on wave setup. J. Marine Res. 21, 410; 1964 Radiation Stresses in water waves; a physical discussion with application. DeepSea Res. 11,529562. PelnardConsid6re R., 1956 Essai de th6orie de l'6volution des formes de rivages en plages de sable et de galets. QuatriOme JournOes de l'Hydraulique, Les Energies de la Mer,
Question 3.
Peregrine D.H., Cokelet E.D. and Mclver P., 1980 The fluid mechanics of the waves approaching breaking. Proc. 17 th Conf. Coastal Eng., ASCE, 512528. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, CERC, 1984 Shore Protection Manual. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Walton T.L., 1994 Shoreline solution for tapered beach fill. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng. 120, 651655. Work P.A. and Dean R.G., 1995 Assessment and prediction of beachnourishment evolution. J. Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Eng. 121,182189. Work P.A. and Rogers W.E., 1997 Wave transformation for beach nourishment projects. Coastal Eng. 32, 118.
119
4.1 The
sea state
Fig. 4.1 shows a record of the surface displacement ~ at a fixed location at sea. As with the periodic waves, ~(t) represents the free surface elevation above the mean water level. A single wave is a piece of r/(t) between two consecutive zero upcrossings; the wave period is the interval between the two extreme zero upcrossings; the wave crest is the highest local m a x i m u m and the wave trough is the lowest local m i n i m u m of the wave; the wave height is measured from trough to crest. We see from the figure that the waves generally have different sizes and shapes. By i d e a l s e a s t a t e we mean an infinitely long stationary time series of wind generated waves. To understand this definition, let us imagine we gather a n u m b e r of sets of N consecutive waves and we estimate the mean height and period of each of these sets: H~, T~ will be respectively the mean wave height and the mean wave period of the first set, H2, T2 will be the mean wave height and the mean wave period of the second set, and so on. For a small N, say N  5 , the pairs (H1, T~), (H2, T2), ... will generally be very different from one another. However, as N grows, the differences between these pairs will tend to vanish, and as N + oc all the pairs will become equal to each other. This is a simple way to introduce the ideal sea state whose mathematical description will be given in the next section. By r e a l s e a s t a t e we mean a sequence of a few hundred windgenerated waves (typically 1 0 0 " 3 0 0 waves). Such a sequence is sufficiently short to be nearly
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
T6
120
Chapter 4
s t a t i o n a r y , a n d it is long e n o u g h for its statistical p r o p e r t i e s to be m e a n i n g f u l . In o t h e r w o r d s , it can be t h o u g h t of as a s e q u e n c e d r a w n f r o m an ideal sea state, a n d we can a s s u m e t h a t its m e a n w a v e h e i g h t a n d p e r i o d are v e r y close to the m e a n w a v e h e i g h t a n d p e r i o d of this ideal sea state. If we d r e w a s e q u e n c e of a few w a v e s f r o m an ideal sea state (i.e. f r o m a s t a t i o n a r y r a n d o m process), the m e a n w a v e h e i g h t a n d p e r i o d of this s e q u e n c e could be v e r y d i f f e r e n t f r o m the m e a n w a v e h e i g h t a n d p e r i o d of the ideal sea state. O n the c o n t r a r y , if we r e c o r d e d a s e q u e n c e of a few t h o u s a n d sea w a v e s , g e n e r a l l y it c o u l d n o t be t h o u g h t of as a s e q u e n c e f r o m an ideal sea state, in t h a t the a s s u m p t i o n of s t a t i o n a r y time series m i g h t be grossly unsatisfied. F o r e x a m p l e , the first h a l f of the s e q u e n c e m i g h t b e l o n g to a stage of n e a r l y c a l m sea, while the s e c o n d h a l f m i g h t include a sea storm. The best duration of a real sea state is that leading to the smallest difference between the first half and the second half. To seek the best duration of a sea state, we have resorted to the time series of experiment RC 1990 in the Straits of Messina off Reggio Calabria. From the wave records we have obtained a number of sequences, each consisting of N / 2 consecutive waves. The first sequence goes from wave number 1 (the first recorded wave) to wave number N/2; the second sequence goes from wave number N/2 + 1 to wave number N, and so on. Then we have evaluated the root mean square surface displacement of each sequence: a~ is the r.m.s, of the first sequence, O"2 the r.m.s, of the second sequence, and so on. Finally, we have defined the random variable
V/~ 0"i+1
1,
(n  1) :
N/2
waves.
40
,000 ,'
20
N
     , i ,  ,  i      , , ,  , , , i,
10
l02
103
Fig. 4.2 Degree of difference between the first half and the second half in a sequence of N waves (from experiment RC 1990).
121
This operation has been repeated with different values of number N (of course N is an even number). As a result we have obtained the function
v/Vf  f (U)
that gives the degree of difference between the first half and the second half of the sequence of N waves. This function is represented by fig. 4.2 which shows that the degree of difference is minimum for N of about one hundred.
General overview
L e t us choose a p o i n t at sea and to m a k e the ideas m o r e specific let us think of the p o i n t as being at the c e n t r e of the T y r r h e n i a n Sea. A t a c e r t a i n time instant w a v e s b e g i n f o r m i n g at this point. T h e s e waves m a y be u n d e r the influence of the wind in a g e n e r a t i n g area, or m a y also be waves out of their g e n e r a t i n g area. In the first case t h e y are called wind waves a n d in the s e c o n d case they are called swells. L e t us r e c o r d ~/(t) at t h e fixed p o i n t a f t e r s o m e t i m e f r o m t h e b e g i n n i n g of the w a v e m o t i o n , say f r o m i n s t a n t ti,f to i n s t a n t tsup, with tsup ti,f = d u r a t i o n of a real sea state, t h a t is a few h u n d r e d c o n s e c u t i v e w a v e s . L e t us n o w s u p p o s e t h a t the s a m e s t o r m is r e p e a t e d m a n y times, e a c h t i m e with t h e s a m e s p e e d , d i r e c t i o n a n d d u r a t i o n of the w i n d all o v e r the T h y r r h e n i a n Sea. T h e n let us i m a g i n e we r e c o r d t h e s u r f a c e d i s p l a c e m e n t ~/(t) at t h e fixed p o i n t , e a c h t i m e s t a r t i n g at instant tinf a n d e n d i n g at i n s t a n t tsup. W e call ~/~ (t), 712 (t), ..., f/,, (t) t h e r e c o r d s so obtained. A c c o r d i n g to the t h e o r y of the sea states to the first o r d e r in a S t o k e s ' e x p a n s i o n , each of the n time series ~/1 (t), ~/2 (t), ..., ~/, (t) is a piece of a n e w r e a l i z a t i o n of a s t a t i o n a r y G a u s s i a n process. E a c h r e a l i z a t i o n of this process has an infinite
(/)
1a i 2 for i such Fig. 4.3 Definition of spectrum: the small dark area is equal to the partial sum ~  ~ that coi belongs to the small interval of amplitude 8cJ. i
122
Chapter 4
duration, and thus it represents the ideal sea state introduced in sect. 4.1. The analytical form of the process is
N
~l(t)  ~
i=1
aicos(~it + Ci)
(4.1)
where it is assumed that frequencies a~i are different from each other, number N is infinitely large, phase angles ci are uniformly distributed on (0,27r) and are stochastically independent of each other, and all amplitudes ai are of the same order. Finally, the frequency spectrum E(a~), which is defined as E (co)6~  Z
i
1 4a~
z_,
(~i <
(d
+ 8C0/2
(4.2)
[see fig. 4.3], is assumed to be continuous and to be the same in each realization. U n d e r these hypotheses, (4.1) represents a stationary Gaussian random process. We shall prove this statement in sect. 5.1. The fact that (4.1) is exact to the first order in a Stokes' expansion will be explained in sect. 8.2, where the theory will be developed on the spacetime. At the present stage and as far as chap. 7, we deal only with the waves on the time domain at some fixed point. 4.2.2 Numerical simulation o f a sea state For a deeper insight into the theory it is useful to see how a sea state can be numerically simulated. To this end we must fix the spectrum E (co) (we shall see later some characteristic shapes of the spectrum). Then let us fix a very large number N, say N = 10 9. Let us now subdivide the aJaxis into 10 9 small intervals, so that the integral of the spectrum over each of these small intervals is equal t o 1 0  9 m 0 , where m0 
Let us call 031 the centroid's abscissa of the first small strip of the spectrum (small because its area is one billionth of the total area of the spectrum), c02 the centroid's abscissa of the second small strip, and so on as far as aJ109. Let us fix the amplitudes a / a l l equal to v/2mo/N. This is the simplest way to fulfil the assumptions on a i and co/. These a i and coi will be left unchanged in the whole set of realizations of the random process. At this stage only the set of ci remains to be fixed. To this end, let us write the integers from 1 to 10 9, each of them on a new sheet of paper. Then let us put these sheets of paper into a box. Let us shuffle and draw the first number. Let us multiply this number by (27r/109), so obtaining Cl. Let us put again the drawn number into the box, shuffle again and draw a new number from which we get c2 (being understood that the drawn number must be multiplied by 27r/109). Let us go on as far as draw No 10 9 from which we shall obtain c~09 . The ones so obtained will be the phase angles c i of the first realization of the process. For obtaining the phase angles c/ of the second realization, we have to
J
0
OG
E(~) d~.
(4.3)
123
repeat the whole procedure: to draw the first number; to multiply it by (2rr/109); to put the sheet again into the box; to shuffle; to draw the second number, and so on. Clearly, we are speaking of an ideal procedure!
c r  V/< r]2(t)>,
(4.4)
with the temporal mean covering the whole duration of the sea state, gives the most direct idea of the strength of the wave motion. The larger the c7, the higher the waves. The parameter most commonly used is probably the significant wave height being defined as H,  4~. (4.5) The first theories (in the 50's) gave H, as equal to H1/3 that is the average height of the highest onethird of all the waves of a particular sea state. To better understand the meaning of H~/3, let us think of ordering the wave heights of a sea state" H1 is the highest wave height, He the second highest wave height, and so on as far as H,, that is the smallest wave height (n being the number of the waves forming the sea state). Then H~/3 proceeds from the following operation
H1 + H2 +... +nn/3
n/3
In other words, the researchers who started the modern ocean engineering aimed to introduce a significant average being representative of the greatest wave heights occurring in a sea state. Later the term significant average wave height was shortened to the form significant wave height. As to fix H, equal to 4(r, now we know that H~/3 is systematically smaller (of 5 " 1 0 % ) with respect to 4or. Nevertheless, H, is still used for the strength of the wave motion, like some old units of length are used in place of the metre. The peak frequency (symbol COp) is the frequency of the highest peak of the spectrum. The peak period is the wave period associated with the peak frequency:
L 
Lp denotes the wavelength relevant to the peak period, and Lpo is the wavelength on deep water: gT 2 Lpo P 27r
124
Chapter 4
The symbol mj denotes the jth order moment of the spectrum mj 0 wJE (a2) dw. (4.6)
The zeroth moment, that is the integral of the spectrum over (0, ec), has been already defined in sect. 4.2.2 [see definition (4.3)]. The definition of
autocovariance is
 < ,(t),(t + r) >,
(4.7)
and thus it is the mean value of the product of the surface displacement at time t and the surface displacement at the later time t + T. Naturally, this mean value depends on T, that is the autocovariance is a function of T. The definition of autocovariance may look abstract like some useless mathematical exercise. On the contrary, we shall see in chap. 9 that the autocovariance takes on a central role in the light of the quasideterminism theory. Moreover, we shall also see in this chapter how the autocovariance can be applied to make a quick and clear "diagnosis" of a sea state; in short, the use of autocovariance is like the use of Xrays in medicine. We shall also see in chap. 5 that the basic statistical properties of the waves in a sea state depend on the characteristics of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance. 4.3.2
oo
E (w) dco.
0
(4.8)
and hence, interchanging the order of temporal mean and summation, we write
N N
< ~l:(t) >  Z E aiaj < cos(wit + ei)cos (wit + ej) > .
i=1 j = l
(4.9)
Here we have
lif 2 0 if
ij,
(4.10)
i C j,
(4.11)
/~1 1 a 2
2i
Wind generated waves: basic concepts which completes the proof, in that definition (4.2) of spectrum implies /~l 1 a 2 i
125
E (co) dco
0
and spectrum
(4.12) (4.7) of
To arrive at this relation we have to start from the definition autocovariance, and use (4.1) of r/(t). The result is
N N
~(T)  Z
i=l j=l
where the order of temporal mean and summation has been interchanged. Then applying the addition formula to the second cosine we obtain
N N
~(T)  Z
i=1
Z
j=l
Here the first temporal mean is given by (4.10), and the second temporal mean is zero whichever the i and j, and therefore
N
O ( T )  ~ 1 ~ a
2 i
COS
(CU i T)
(4.13)
Let us consider the summation on the r.h.s, of this equation. Since {contribution to Ni~l l a 2 i cos ( ~ i T ) f r o m t h e t e r m s w h o s e f r e q u e n c y coi i s b e t w e e co  8co/2 and co + 8co/2} 
 {
2 i
we have ~1
i= 1 T
a:
i COS
(co,T)
ioo ~ o
126
Chapter 4
4.3.4 The three basic properties of the autocovariance The main properties of the autocovariance are: 1st property: ~b(  T) = ~b(T), 2nd property: [~b(T)[ < ~b(0) for T 0, 3rd property: lim ~b(T)  0. The first p r o p e r t y proceeds straightforwardly from relation (4.12) b e t w e e n autocovariance and spectrum. The second property can be readily proved from (4.12), given that the spectrum is positive and continuous. The third property can be deduced as follows. If we fix a very large Irl the function cos(wT) (function of co) has a very small period 6w = 27r/I r ] , so that E (w) keeps practically constant while cos (wr) makes a full cycle. Therefore the contribution to the integral
from the small interval 5w approaches zero. The same conclusion holds for each small interval 6~, and consequently the integral approaches zero as ITI + ~ . 4.3.5 A few alternative ways to express the variance of the surface displacement Gathering (i) the definition (4.4) of or, (ii) the definition (4.5) of Hs, (iii) the definition (4.6) of mj, (iv) the relation (4.8) between < ~/2 (t) > and the spectrum, (v) the relation (4.12) between ~b(T) and the spectrum, we obtain the following equalities < ~/2 (t) > a2 ~ = m0 16
H2
E (w)dw  ~b(0).
127
be d e d u c e d easily (one has simply to estimate the average of the m e a s u r e d elevations and to subtract this average from these elevations). Thus we obtain the data (r/~, r/2, ..., ~7,,) of a real sea state. T h e n from these data, we can straightforwardly c o m p u t e the standard deviation:
(7"2 2 2 T]I  ~ ~]2 q "'"  ~ ~]n .
/7
Hence, multiplying cr by 4, we obtain the significant wave height. E v e n the autocovariance can be obtained quite simply. For example, let us imagine we have a wave record of 10 minutes with a sampling rate of 10 per second. At the end we shall have obtained 6000 sampled data (~7~, r/2, . . . , 7]6000) taken at regular intervals of 0.1 s. Thus to evaluate, say, ~ ( T ) for T = l s, it will suffice to p e r f o r m the following operation:
2/)(1S) T]l 7111 ~ 7127112 ~ "'" _31_7]5990/]6000
5990 which gives the m e a n value of the product of the surface displacements at time t and the surface displacement at time t + ls. Obtaining the spectrum is not as simple, and hence the rest of this section is d e v o t e d to this operation. 4.4.2 T h e F o u r i e r s e r i e s a n d t h e l i n e s p e c t r u m Given an odd n u m b e r n of data (~/~, 712 , Atsamp, that is to say recorded at instants
..., 7In )
aicos(cvit)
if a i
II
sin(cait)
i=I
with
N(n
is such that
1)/2,
(.Z)i  
a'
i
,, ai 
2
17
j=l
rlj sin(coitj)
77F ( I n )
  ~]n"
(4.14)
~lf (t)  Z
i=l
ai cos(c~it + c,),
128
Chapter 4
where ai, ~i are related to a 'i, a". i [Write COS(aJit4~i) in the form COS (a3i t) COS Ci  s i n (edit) sine~ to obtain the relation between ai, ~i and a Ii, a II i .] The spectrum EF(W) of function ~/F (t) consists of a sequence of delta functions:
N
EF(CO)  Z  ~ i=1
It is the line spectrum whose graph is a sequence of vertical arrows with heights 1 a 2 at frequencies 2 i
(.d i
The fact that ~TF(t) is periodic with a period TF implies that also the autocovariance ~F (T) is periodic with a period TF. Indeed
fF ( T)  < rIF (t) rIF (t + T) >  < rIF (t) ~lF (t + T + TF) >  ~F ( T + TF) .
Autocovariance @F(T) is related to amplitudes ai and frequencies wi of the Fourier series by N ~F (T) ~ a ~ c o s (wiT),
Z 
(4.15)
and, for a wide interval after the origin T = 0, it proves to be nearly coincident with ~ ( T ) . Some discrepancies between the two functions arise only for large T, which is understandable if one thinks that ~ (T) is defined for T smaller than the duration of the sea state, whereas ~F (T) is defined even for arbitrarily large T. 4.4.3 T h e o r e t i c a l f o u n d a t i o n s Let us define the function
to o b t a i n the c o n t i n u o u s s p e c t r u m
that, thanks to (4.15), is rewritten in the form ~ 2 1 a~ cos ((.x2 iT) cos (wT) d T . (4.16)
/_15
This function satisfies the following property: 1 sin(27rx) dx EF (w) dw  1  a2 2 J _~ 7r x ,1wj2 2rc/,7
wj+227r/.7 ....
j2
oc
(4.17)
(where it is u n d e r s t o o d that, for x  0 , the quotient sin(27rx)/x has to be substituted by its limit as x ~ 0). The integral on the r.h.s.rapidly converges on 1 if we fix larger and larger values of 2. This implies that EF(W) (the integrand on
129
the 1.h.s.) has an infinitely high a n d n a r r o w p e a k at wj, a n d t h e a r e a u n d e r this p e a k is ~ 1 aj. 2 T h e conclusion is that b o t h EF(W) and EF(W) as ,~Z+ ec consist of the s a m e s e q u e n c e of infinitely high and n a r r o w p e a k s on f r e q u e n c i e s a4, w2, ... WN. For verifying (4.17), use the definition (4.16) of EF(~). Pay attention to the fact that index j is fixed, while index i varies from 1 to N. Replace variable w with J Apply the addition formula to cos(wjT+27rxT/.U). Note that all the terms of the summation are negligible with respect to the one for i  j . Note that cos2(wjT) and cos (27rxT/.7) are functions like the ones of fig. 4.4, so that you can use the equality cos 2 (wiT)cos
0 .
xT dT  1 2 o
cos
27rx
dT
as . ~
oc,
where  1 on the r.h.s, is the average of cos 2. Then you will be able to prove equation (4.17) in 2 a few simple steps. 4.4.4
G i v e n that the c o n t i n u o u s s p e c t r u m of the ideal sea state m u s t of necessity be similar to the line s p e c t r u m of the real sea state, we s e e k a c o n t i n u o u s s p e c t r u m t h a t is equivalent to the line s p e c t r u m . W e shall j u d g e the e q u i v a l e n c e t h r o u g h two m a i n features: (i) the c u m u l a t i v e function
I
J
0 OG 0
E (w)cos
(wT) dw.
Clearly, the a u t o c o v a r i a n c e of the s p e c t r u m Ee(w) is r e ( T ) ; a n d the c u m u l a t i v e f u n c t i o n is la2 E e ( w ' ) dw' Z 2 J J o for j such t h a t wj < w. N
_
J0 Ee (w') dw
1 Z ~ a~
i=l
130
Chapter 4
.cosZ(eoj T)
Fig. 4.4 J is very large, a~j and x are fixed, and T is the independent variable. Therefore the function cos[(27r/57)xT] varies much more gradually than cos2(0JjT).
4.4.5 How to obtain the continuous spectrum The gist of sect. 4.4.3 is: evaluate I(~)  
r .7
d0
~p(T)cos(~T)dT,
(4.18)
for increasing values of the upper limit 3 , and you will obtain a continuous function that, apart from a constant, approximates the line spectrum better and better. An example is given by figs. 4.567. We see a line spectrum, the same in each figure, and function (4.18) for a few different 3 : 3 ~ 2.5Tp in fig. 4.5, 3 ~ 5Tp in fig. 4.6, 3 TM IOTp in fig. 4.7. (The graphs are given in a normalized form, and this is why the spectrum's peak is equal to 1 in each picture.) We see the result of integral (4.18) fits the line spectrum better as 3 grows. We start from a small 3 with a sketch, and then we tend to the exact picture as 3  + oc. The interesting point is that even the sketches accurately reflect the essential features of the line spectrum. In order to realize this crucial point, let us take one of these sketches as the continuous spectrum. Specifically, let us assume  const I (oJ) if I (~) >_ 0, (4.19)
E(~)
_0
if I(oJ)<0,
with const such as to satisfy condition (4.8). Then, let us compare S(oJ) and 0 ( T ) from this spectrum with .~F (0J) and OF(T) from the line spectrum. We see that the agreement between 5 ( ~ ) and .~F (~) and 0 (T) and OF (T) is rather good even for 3 ~ 2.5Tp (fig. 4.5), and becomes nearly perfect for 3 ~ 5Tp (fig. 4.6) and 3 TM lOTp (fig. 4.7). Naturally, for large ITI, ~ (T) will deviate from 2/)F ( T ) , since 0 (T) ~ 0 as IT I ~ oc, while ~)F(T) is periodic. But what is important is that the two autocovariances are coincident on a large interval after the origin. Indeed, we shall see in chap. 5 that the basic statistical properties of a sea state depend only on the first wave of the autocovariance (that is the wave including the origin T = 0); moreover the
131
E(w)/E~
0.5
0(0)
0.5
/
0.5
eo
4 T[s]
Fig. 4.5 A typical line spectrum from a record of wind waves. The continuous spectrum has been obtained by means of (4.1819) with .Y ~ 2.5Tp. The two lower panels show the function .~(~) and the autocovariance ~ (T) (points: line spectrum, continuous line" continuous spectrum).
configuration of the wave groups depends only on the first two or three waves of the autocovariance, that we shall call core of the autocovariance. The conclusion is that a n u m b e r of continuous spectra, sometimes appearing very different from each other, are equally equivalent to the line spectrum. T h e r e f o r e the continuous spectrum is indeterminate! In practice this indeterminacy is not an obstacle, because two sea states with two different spectra like the ones of fig. 4.6 and fig. 4.7 have the same basic statistical properties. Hence, we can assume at our choice the one or the other of the two
132
Chapter 4
E(w)/Em~
0.5
w[rad/s]
1 2 3 4 5 6 8
0.5
........ _ ........
0 1 2 3 ,4 5 ~ 7
t0!rad/s]
8
~0(r) ~0(0)
0.5 T[s]
0.5
Fig. 4.6 The line spectrum is the same as in fig. 4.5; the continuous spectrum has been obtained with 3  5Tp in (4.18). We see that now the .~(c~) and ~(T) of the continuous spectrum coincide perfectly with the .~(c~) and ~(T) of the line spectrum.
spectra. For convenience, the best choice is to take the smallest 3 giving the full equivalence between the continuous spectrum and the line spectrum. This is because the spectrum shape gets simpler. Typically, 3 = 4 + 5Tp is large enough. For T < 5 Tp, ~)F(T) is usually very close to the ~ (T) obtained from the time series data of ~7(t), so we can use this ~ ( T ) in place of ~F(T). Before we obtain the spectrum, we do not know Tp, and therefore the question arises, how to estimate 4  5Tp? A good preliminary estimate can be done on taking Tp equal to the average period of the two highest waves of function ~(T).
133
E(co)/E~
0.5 ,,A
p 1 2
.
3
.
4
.
5 6 7
)[rad/s!
8
~'(to)
0.5
......'""4"""''"
6 ...... i
"~
to[rad/sl 8
W(T) W(O)
0.5
T[s]
0.5
1
Fig. 4.7 The line spectrum is the same as in the two previous figures" , ~ h a s been raised up to lOTp. The result is a more indented spectrum. The agreement between the continuous spectrum and the line spectrum for what concerns .7(,~) and ~(T) keeps on being excellent.
To make the study of this section easier, it will be useful to bear in mind that three autocovariances are involved: (i) the one obtained straightforwardly from the time series data of ~l(t), through the definition itself of autocovariance; (ii) the one obtained from the continuous spectrum; (iii) the one obtained from the line spectrum. The first two have been denoted by the symbol ~ (T), while the third one has been denoted by ~F (T) The three functions prove to be coincident with one another on a wide interval after the origin. For large IT] they become different from one another: the first function is
134
Chapter 4
~E(CO)IEm~
//swells 0.5
/ wind waves /
at(w)
0.5
.oJ[rad/s]
~(r) r(o)
0.5
4

T[sl
0.5 1 Fig. 4.8 A sea state consisting of wind waves and swells: the continuous spectrum has been
defined only for IT[ smaller than the duration of the wave record; the second function approaches zero as ITI ~ ~ ; the third function is periodic with a period equal to the length of the wave record. 4.4.6 The case o f wind waves s u p e r i m p o s e d on swells The one shown in the previous section is a typical spectrum of the wind waves but the m e t h o d is efficient even for the swells. A n example is given in fig. 4.8 which shows the spectrum of wind waves of 2s period on swells of 6.5s. The highest peak
135
E(w)/E~
swells
/j
wind waves
0.5
l
Z2~I,
1 2 3
w[rad/s]
4
0.5
v.~"
f
S , i , ,
~o[rad/s]
~0(r) ~0(0)
0.5
5 ,
y
T[s]
0.5
1
Fig. 4.9 A very broad spectrum: about a half of the energy content belongs to wind waves and a half to swells with a frequency nearly three times smaller. Here too the continuous spectrum has been obtained by means of (4.1819).
of the spectrum is that of the wind waves, the second peak is that of the swells. The two peaks of E (a~) give rise to the two steps of .~(c~); of course the two domains w h e r e . ~(a~) has a high rate of growth are those of the two peaks of E(a~). We see that the 25% of the spectrum's energy belongs to the swells and the remaining 75% to the wind waves.
136
Chapter 4
This is the picture emerging both from .7(co) and from o% (co), which are nearly coincident with each other. ~ has been taken of 20 s, that is about ten times the Tp of the wind waves and three times the Tp of the swells. Generally, as we noted, the best value of ~ i s nearly 5Tp but in this case the spectrum consists of two stumps with some very different Tp, so that we must make a compromise, taking g  greater than five times the smaller Tp and smaller than five times the larger Tp. For the rest, the continuous spectrum E(co) is deeply equivalent to the line spectrum, as we can judge on comparing S(co) to ZF (co) and ~b(T) to Lastly, let us consider an extremely chaotic sea state, where some wind waves are superimposed on swells of nearly the same height. This case is illustrated in fig. 4.9 where ~ h a s been taken of 25 s, that is somewhat less than four times the Tp of the swells, which is equal to 6.7s. Also in this case the equivalence between the continuous spectrum and the line spectrum clearly emerges if we compare S(c0) to SF (co) and ~b(T) to 2/ (T). Really those of figs. 4.89, rather than spectra of surface waves, are the spectra of some pressure head waves beneath the water surface. However, for the aims of this section, it does not matter whether the spectrum is of the surface waves or of the pressure head waves. Resorting to the pressure head waves is useful for didactic purposes, since a spectrum with a fixed ratio between swells' energy and wind waves' energy can be found more easily in these waves.
The J O N S W A P spectrum
As previously mentioned, when a wind generates waves and hence waves and wind have nearly the same direction, we speak of wind waves. Such waves typically have a spectrum like that of fig. 4.6 where E (co) approaches rapidly zero on the left side and approaches zero more gradually on the right side. A mathematical form suggested for describing this characteristic spectrum shape is E(co) 
AgZco5 exp

exp ln)~lexp 
"
This is the so called J O N S W A P spectrum (Hasselmann et al., 1973) which is effective for deep water:
d > ~ Lpo.
The variations of the spectrum on shallow water will be dealt with in chap. 8. The J O N S W A P spectrum was the final result of a work developed in the 50's and 60's. Phillips was the first to observe in the 50's that the spectrum approaches zero,
137
for large a~, as cos. The term A g2 cos in the formula (4.20) is due to him, and indeed A is called the Phillips parameter. The form E(aJ)  A g2coSexp [ 5 (~)41 (4.21)
was introduced by Pierson and Moskowitz in the 60's. The last improvement, that is the introduction of the second exponential function, was due to the J O N S W A P project in the early 70's. According to the researchers of the J O N S W A P project, the more characteristic values of the shape parameters X~ and )(~2are X~3.3, but we can as well assume X2  0.07 if co _< (.Up,  0 . 0 9 if c0>a~p,
( 4.22 )
Xl = 3,
X2=0.08,
with some negligible consequences. The spectrum with values (4.22) of parameters X1 and X2 is called the mean J O N S W A P . It is shown by fig. 4.10 in the nondimensional form E(aJ)/E(~p) as a function of co/aJp. It should be noted that such a nondimensional form depends only on the values of X~ and X2. Therefore, fig. 4.10 represents the mean J O N S W A P spectrum, whatever the peak frequency a~p and Phillips' parameter. As to parameter A, it depends on the characteristics of the wave generation: the smaller is fetch ~ and the greater is wind speed u, the larger is A. The researchers of the J O N S W A P project suggested the relation A _ 0.076 ( g ~ )
U2
22
As an exercise, the reader could verify that the peak of the Pierson and Moskowitz spectrum occurs at co  COp.To this end, it suffices to differentiate (4.21) with respect to co and
EIEm~
(D] ~Op_
138
Chapter 4
verify that the derivative is zero only for a~ = Wp. Then for verifying that also the JONSWAP spectrum [function (4.20)] has its maximum at aJ = CVp,it will suffice to note that (i) the second exponential function in (4.20) is equal to X1 at a~ = Wp and approaches 1 as Icy (.dpl grows; (ii) X1 takes on values greater than 1. Therefore the second exponential function in (4.20) makes even more prominent the peak at a~p.
4.5.2
l}d [,w
Here it is convenient to replace the dimensional variable a~ with the nondimensional variable
w=
and it is convenient to define the nondimensional spectrum g ~ ( w )  w Sexp  4wexp lnXlexp 
(s 4){
0
2 2X2
(4.24)
that will be repeatedly used in what follows. Substituting w for a~ in (4.23), we have
m 0  A g 2 (.u; 4 ~ (w) dw.
The integral of ~(w) is evaluated numerically and, with values (4.22) of X~ and X2, the result is 0.305. Therefore m0  0.305AgZa~p4. Hence, bearing in mind that m0 relation:
H2/16
and Tp 
27r/~p we
r,
~/
o.3o53
27r @ H ,
4g
(4.26)
As previously mentioned, the value of A depends on the characteristics of the wave generation. A typical value for design conditions is A =0.01, with which, the relation between Tp and
Hs becomes
(4.27)
 8.57r ,/Hs. v 4g
139
i i
i,,
~_~
..~:
ii ~
5 km
5 km
: i :
~,~:17
~ i~ .... i
Fig. 4.11 The points P~ in a lake and P2 off a coast have the same relatively small g/~/U 2. Consequently, the waves at these points will be very steep.
Note that, even a variation of 20% on A leads to a variation of only 5% on the numerical coefficient 8.5 in (4.27). Relation (4.26) shows that the p e a k period gets smaller u n d e r the same significant wave height for a larger A. Since we saw in sect. 4.5.1 that the smaller the fetch and the stronger the wind the larger is A, we can see a characteristic feature of the wind waves. The r e a d e r may have o b s e r v e d a relatively small fetch lashed by a strong wind (two possible situations are shown in fig. 4.11 just to fix the ideas). In that case it will have b e e n n o t e d that the waves b r e a k even on deep water. The p h e n o m e n o n is due to the fact that the waves are too steep owing to the large A. I n d e e d from (4.26) it follows that the characteristic wave steepness is /4, = 2 v / 0 . 3 0 5 A tp0 7r 4.5.3 Dynamic similarity between stormy seas and slight seas Let us consider a sea state consisting of small wind waves g e n e r a t e d by a w e a k wind, say waves of H~ = 0.30m. Relation (4.26) with the characteristic value A = 0.01 of Phillips' p a r a m e t e r gives a p e a k period Tp  2.33s, for this sea state. Let us consider now a stormy sea state, say one with
H, = 9.0m.
Here, relation (4.26) with A = 0.01 gives Tp = 12.79s.
140
Chapter 4
Therefore the first sea state is the small scale model (1:30) of the second sea state, with the same Froude number. Indeed the quotient between the wave periods of the two sea states is equal to the square root of the quotient between the wave heights. The dynamic similarity is full, in that the normalized autocovariance is the same for the model sea state and the prototype sea state. Which means that the same statistical properties exist in the model sea state as in the prototype sea state (this statement will be proved in chap 5); in particular the probability of a wave height greater than a threshold c~Hs (~ being arbitrarily fixed) is the same for the model sea state and the prototype sea state. Let us prove that the normalized autocovariance is the same for the model sea state and the prototype sea state. From relation (4.12) between the autocovariance and the spectrum, and formula (4.20) of the J O N S W A P spectrum, we have
(T)f0 Ag2c5expl4
Then, replacing ~ with w =_W/~p and using definition (4.24) of ~ (w), we arrive at
(w) cos
(r)
~(0)
joo
0
dw
(4.28)
f ( w ) dw
Hence, given T~ Tp we can obtain ~(T)/~b (0) leaving/4, and ~p out of consideration. This implies that ~(T)/~b(O) as a function of T/Tp does not change from the prototype sea state to the model sea state.
141
1.0
waves)
0.5
,.l
6.0
1.0
ik (pressure head
~~/ 0.51
/
T[s]
0.5
0 1
A/ .
2.0
~/A co [rad/s] . .
4.0
6.0
0.5
0 2 4 0.0 0.0 1.0
/I
(pressureheadwaves)
z=~'5m
2.0 (~sure
6.0
\..
. ~ ~
0.5
2.0
4.0
6.0
Fig. 4.12 Autocovariances and spectra of surface waves and of pressure head waves beneath the water surface. We see that the ratio between swell amplitude and windwave amplitude grows as the depth increases. The reason is that the swell is less attenuated, owing to its greater period. The spectra are given in a normalized form, and this is why the peak has the same height in each picture.
142
Chapter 4
growing depths beneath the water surface (note that the spectra are normalized and this is why they all have the same height). To judge from the surface waves we should conclude that a sea state with this spectrum is a good small scale model of a sea storm. Indeed the significant wave height is of 0.23 m and the peak period is of 2.00 s, which, in a scale of 1:35, lead to a prototype with H~ = 8.0m and Tp  11.8s, which are realistic values of a severe storm in the Mediterranean Sea. However, the dynamic similarity is spoiled by some small swells whose presence is revealed by the small bump on the angular frequency of 0.95 rad/s. Indeed the swells, even if markedly smaller than the wind waves, are able to upset the flow field beneath the water surface. Note in particular in fig. 4.12 the spectrum of the pressure head waves 1.5m beneath the mean water level: the swell's peak has overtaken the wind wave's peak. This upset takes place since the swells undergo a lower attenuation with depth, owing to their greater period. Therefore, the ratio between the swell amplitude and the wind wave amplitude grows from the water surface to the seabed. Clearly, a situation like that of fig. 4.12 is quite unreal for the prototype, indeed the peak period of the pressure head waves would be of (27r/0.95) ~  39s !
Here is the problem: the waves of a size suitable for small scale models often include a swell component with a period several times greater than the period of the wind waves, whereas in a severe storm this is impossible. Keep in mind that a spectrum having a wind wave peak at a frequency c01 and a swell peak at a frequency 0.32 implies that some time before, in some faroff area, there were wind waves of frequency 0.12 . 4.6.2 An exceptionally favourable site Several small scale models were recently executed off the beach at Reggio Calabria (east coast of the Straits of Messina). The model tests of a few different structures were successful thanks to some exceptionally favourable environmental conditions. The most important is that the sea states often consist of pure wind waves with the typical size of a big laboratory tank (0.20 m < Hs < 0.40 m, 1.8 s < Tp < 2.6 s). An example of these pure wind waves with a laboratory size is given by fig. 4.13. We see the surface wave spectrum has no peak on low frequencies, which is confirmed by the spectra of the pressure head waves beneath the water surface. It is not easy to find sea waves with an Hs smaller than 0.50 m and spectra like the ones of fig. 4.13. Off Reggio Calabria this is possible for a few days in a month thanks to: (i) the high stability of a local NNW wind, the so called wind of the Straits blowing from Messina towards Reggio Calabria; (ii) the orientation of the coast. The coast being oriented from SW to NE it is naturally sheltered from the swells travelling towards the north; (iii) the relatively short fetch (about 10 km).
143
rface waves)
0.5
0.75
T[s] 0 2 4 6
1
2.0
0.5
0.85 1
1
l 2.0
 ~ , 4.0
co!rad/s] 6.0
0.5
0.89 1
~
I
co[rad/s]
t
4.0
6.0
0.5
0.87
1 ,
0.0
6
co[rad/s] 0.0
i
2.0
4.0
6.0
Fig. 4.13 N o r m a l i z e d autocovariances and spectra of surface waves and of pressure head waves at growing depths b e n e a t h the water surface. T h e y are pure wind waves with a size suitable for small scale models.
144
N
Chapter 4
TYRRHENIAN SEA /
J IONIAN SEA
Cape Spartivento
Fig. 4.14 Straits of Messina. The arrow points to the location of the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria.
Probably similar conditions occur in some lakes, and we have to look at the lakes rather than at the sea for developing the natural models. However the laboratory of Reggio Calabria possesses an additional series of favourable conditions making it special.
First: the high stability of the local wind, which we have already pointed out as a cause of the near absence of swells (this wind blowing from the north opposes the swells from the south). Clearly, the wind stability is also useful for operating. Indeed, the wind often keeps steady from morning to evening, which provides many suitable hours to test the models. Second: the small tide amplitude (typically within 0.10m). The small tide amplitude is a requisite for the small scale models. The tide amplitude of Reggio Calabria has not yet raised any difficulty. Third: the clearness of the water, which is really exceptional to be found in front of a city. The water is extremely clear because of the Straits' current that flows twice a day. It is quite obvious that the clearness of the water is another requisite for a natural laboratory. Indeed, in the sea or in the lake the small scale model of an ocean structure requires a lot of underwater work. In fixing the model scale one has to bear in mind that the most typical/4, at Reggio Calabria is about 0.30m. Therefore, if one wishes to test an offshore platform under 15 m of significant wave height, the model scale should be 1:50 or, if one wishes to test a submerged floating tunnel under H~ ~ 10m, the model scale should be 1:30. The 1:50 scale model of an offshore platform (height 3 m, base diameter 2 m, water depth 2.5 m) and the 1:30 scale model of a floating tunnel (diameter 0.90m, depth of the centre 1.5 m, water depth 3 m) were tested in the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria as we shall see in chap. 11.
145
of infinitely narrow
spectrum
T h e k n o w l e d g e of the b a n d w i d t h is useful to u n d e r s t a n d the nature of a sea state. To realize the relation b e t w e e n b a n d w i d t h and wave characteristics it is convenient to start from the concept of infinitely n a r r o w spectrum. Let us refer to the t h e o r y of the sea states and let us take the s p e c t r u m of fig. 4.15, a very high triangle with a very small base 6aJ, and a finite area m0. The surface displacement at a fixed time to can be written in the form
(4.29)
The surface displacement at the instant to + n Tp, with n an arbitrary integer, can be written as
(4.30)
Hence
rl(to + n Tp) ~ 1,
(to)
(4.31)
p r o v i d e d that
n << Wp 5cu
146
Chapter 4
Equation (4.31) proceeds straightforwardly from (4.29) and (4.30); it suffices to note that the argument of the ith cosine in (4.30) differs from the argument of the ith cosine in (4.29) of n27r, plus a term smaller than n(6a;/2a;p)27r. As an example, let us assume
COp/ 5cO = 10 6,
n = 10.
Then, the difference between the ith cosine of the summation (4.30) and the ith cosine of the summation (4.29) will be smaller than 7r/105 (as can be easily verified). This means that rl(to + 10Tp) will be nearly coincident with ~(to). Naturally, even more so, the conclusion holds for rl(to + Tp), rl(to +2Tp), ..., ~7(to + 9Tp). Through the same reasoning, we can also realize that ri(to + 106Tp) will be generally different from rl(to). Being to arbitrary, we conclude that r/(t) will locally approach a periodic function of period Tp. Then we can easily prove this to be a sinusoidal function. The difference with respect to a pure sinusoidal function is that each wave shows a small r a n d o m variation from the preceding one, and the sum of these small variations, after a very large n u m b e r of waves, can give rise to some large variation of the wave height. In conclusion, a sea state with an infinitely narrow spectrum would be similar to a sequence of periodic waves. H o w e v e r there would be a substantial difference as the wave height would vary largely though very gradually. Clearly, the n a r r o w e r the spectrum, the closer the waves would be to this ideal condition. Vice versa, the wider the spectrum, the more irregular the waves, that is, the greater the differences among consecutive waves. 4.7.2 B a n d w i d t h p a r a m e t e r s c a n d v It is helpful to express a comment on a sea state with only a few key parameters. A m o n g these parameters we should include an index of how much the waves deviate from the ideal condition of the infinitely narrow spectrum. Such an index is called bandwidth parameter, and is generally 0 for the infinitely narrow spectrum and approaches 1 as the bandwidth grows. Cartwright and LonguetHiggins (1956) used the bandwidth p a r a m e t e r c1m2
morn4
which really is not always efficient, in that it is too sensitive to the high frequency noise. Let us see why with an example. The moments of the spectrum of fig. 4.16 are
147
and hence
(1 + n)2
e 1(1 + n~)(1
+/,./3)
Thus, c a p p r o a c h e s 1 as n + oc, which suggests the idea of an e x t r e m e difference with respect to the case of the infinitely n a r r o w spectrum. Really, as n + oc, the waves with this s p e c t r u m are practically the same as the waves with the infinitely n a r r o w spectrum. With the n a k e d eye these waves look exactly like the waves of the infinitely n a r r o w spectrum, and only if we used a magnifier should we find that their surface is pitted with a lot of very small ripples. Thus, in this case c misses the mark. T h e fact is that resorting to c is equivalent to judging by the n u m b e r of the local m a x i m a (or minima) being p r e s e n t in each wave; the g r e a t e r this n u m b e r , the g r e a t e r the difference from the infinitely n a r r o w spectrum. With the s p e c t r u m of fig. 4.16, each wave has an infinitely large n u m b e r of local m a x i m a due to the very small noise on the wave surface, and this is why e gets the u p p e r limit. F o r the same reason, c is equal to 1 also for the J O N S W A P spectrum. I n d e e d also with the J O N S W A P spectrum, the waves are affected by a high f r e q u e n c y noise of very small amplitude. T h e noise is due to the high f r e q u e n c y tail of the s p e c t r u m which a p p r o a c h e s zero as cos as co+ oc. C o n s e q u e n t l y m4 tends to infinity and c a p p r o a c h e s 1, just as in the above example. In 1975 L o n g u e t  H i g g i n s used a new b a n d w i d t h p a r a m e t e r :
/) m
. m o m 2
mol
,_top
mol/n
n%
Fig. 4.16
148
Chapter 4
whose range is (0, c~). This new parameter is more effective than e. However, for the spectrum of fig. 4.16 it tends to infinity.
4.7.3 Narrow bandedness parameter ~* Let us define ~*  absolute value of the quotient between the absolute minimum and the absolute maximum of the autocovariance, that is where T*  abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance function. If the spectrum is infinitely narrow, the autocovariance approaches a cosine, and thus ~* approaches 1. As the bandwidth grows, ~* gets smaller and smaller approaching 0. Therefore ~* is a narrow bandedness parameter, i.e. it is the one's complement of a bandwidth parameter. It is a natural parameter in that it appeared from the solution for the wave height probability. Indeed, as we shall see later, the distribution of the wave heights is governed by this parameter; and two sea states having the same ~* and Hs have also the same distribution of the wave heights. The smaller the ~*, the larger are the discrepancies of this distribution from that pertaining to the infinitely narrow spectrum. This is because ~* succeeds in giving a clear idea of how much the waves deviate from the condition of the infinitely narrow spectrum. Using ~* we shall not be muddled by the high frequency noise. For example the autocovariance of the spectrum of fig. 4.16 is
1 ~ ( T ) = mol cos (a;pT) +   mol cos (na;p T) .
n
As n  + c~, this ~ ( T ) is a cosine affected by a very small noise. Therefore ~* approaches 1 as in the case of the infinitely narrow spectrum; that is ~* correctly classifies the waves with this spectrum as very close to the waves with the infinitely narrow spectrum. Really, ~* is efficient if the absolute minimum of the autocovariance is also the first minimum of this function. Indeed the above mentioned solution for the wave height distribution requires that the absolute minimum of ~ ( T ) is also the first minimum after the origin. The fact (rather rare) that this condition is not satisfied is itself important to understand the nature of the sea state, as we shall see in sect. 4.7.5.
149
The quotient ~(T)/~(O) as a function of T/Tp [function (4.28)] is shown in fig. 4.17, for the mean J O N S W A P spectrum (X~ = 3.3; X2  0 . 0 8 ) . From this figure we see that ~* = 0.73 for the mean J O N S W A P spectrum.
The dependence of ~* on the spectrum shape proves to be rather weak. Letting )(~1 range from 1 to 7, which according to the researchers of the J O N S W A P project is the whole range of variability of this parameter, ~* grows from 0.65 to 0.75. The variability of ~* due to the second shape parameter X2 is even smaller. In summary, based on the J O N S W A P spectrum, we conclude that 0.65 < ~* < 0.75 is the typical domain of the wind waves. The experience, based on a few thousand sea states recorded in the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria, confirms (0.65, 0.75) as the typical domain of ~* for the wind waves. If ~* falls below 0.60, we are probably dealing with wind waves superimposed on swells. Indeed the presence of wind waves and swells leads to a wider spectrum, and consequently to a smaller ~*. An efficient way to properly understand the nature of a sea state is to compare the ~* of the surface waves with the ~* of the pressure head waves beneath the water surface. Two emblematic examples are those of figs. 4.12 and 4.13 which were discussed in sect. 4.6. In the case of the wind waves (fig. 4.13), the spectrum shrinks gradually from the water surface to the seabed, since it sheds its high frequency tail; accordingly ~* grows from the surface waves to the pressure head waves. The opposite occurs if the wind waves are superimposed on some smaller swells (fig.
r*.
I
j
1
~ N
[0.731 . . . . 1 0
I
2
Fig. 4.17 Normalized autocovariance obtained from the mean JONSWAP spectrum.
150
Chapter 4
4.12). Here, as the depth grows the high frequency peak (the one of the wind waves) gets smaller more rapidly than the low frequency peak (the one of the swells). Therefore, generally there is a critical depth where the two peaks of the spectrum take on the same height. At this critical depth the bandwidth reaches its maximum, and hence ~* has a minimum. 4.7.5 The nature o f the waves if the first local m i n i m u m o f the autocovariance
The link between sea state and Gaussian random process was first noticed by LonguetHiggins (1952). The theory of the sea states then ripened in the 60's, thanks to the contribution of several authors [see the references at the end of chap. 8 which gives the theory on the spacetime]. The central role we have attributed to the autocovariance proceeds from the quasideterminism theory (see chap. 9). In particular the fact that the main statistical properties of a sea state are coded in the first two waves of the autocovariance (the core of the autocovariance) is a consequence of the aforesaid theory. Also the narrow bandedness parameter ~* proceeds from a corollary of this theory, as we shall see in sect. 9.10. The continuos spectrum is usually estimated following the BlackmanTukey method (1958), or the method based on the Fourier Transform of the time series
151
data (Bendat and Piersol, 1986). With the first method, E(a~) is obtained through the relation E (a~)  2 ~ (T) cos (a~T) d T
7l0
which proceeds from the WienerKhinchine theorem. In the applications, ~(T) is the autocovariance obtained from the time series data through definition (4.7). Given that ~(T) gets less and less reliable as T approaches the length of the record, it is c o m m o n practice to multiply ~(T) by some deterministic window function which is close to 1 near the origin and approaches 0 as T grows. With the second m e t h o d the record is divided into a n u m b e r of segments. The line spectrum is obtained for each segment, and these line spectra are averaged to obtain the continuous spectrum. A time window is usually used to eliminate the discontinuities at the beginning and end of each segment. Here we have followed an alternative approach which removes the degree of subjectivity inherent in both the above cited methods: choice of the window in the first m e t h o d (Moskowitz, 1964) and choice of the n u m b e r of segments in the second m e t h o d (Borgman, 1972 and Harris, 1974). We have used I~F(T) (the periodic autocovariance associated with the line spectrum) rather than ~(T), and we have obtained the continuous spectrum through (4.1819). The advantage is that for .7> 5Tp the solution converges, in that the core of the autocovariance associated with the continuous spectrum keeps constant.
References
Bendat J. S. and Piersol A. G., 1986 Random data: analysis and measurement procedures. J. Wiley & Sons, 1566. Blackman R.B. and Tukey J.W., 1958 The measurement of power spectra. Dover Publications Inc., 1190. Borgman L. E., 1972 Confidence intervals for ocean wave spectra. Proc. 13 'h Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE, 237250. Cartwright D. E. and LonguetHiggins M. S., 1956 The statistical distribution of the maxima of a random function. Proc. Roy. Soc. London A 237, 213232. Harris D. L., 1974 Finite spectrum analyses of wave records. Proc. Int. Symp. On Wave Measurement and Analysis ASCE, 107124. Hasselmann K., Barnett T. P., Bouws E. et al., 1973 Measurements of wind wave growth and swell decay during the Joint North Sea Wave Project (JONSWAP). Deut. Hydrogr. Zeit. A8, 195. LonguetHiggins M. S., 1952 On the statistical distribution of the heights of sea waves. J. Mar. Res. 11,245266; 1975 On the joint distribution of the periods and amplitudes of sea waves. J. Geophys. Res. 80, 26882694. Moskowitz L., 1964 Estimates of power spectrums for fully developed seas for wind speeds of 20 to 40 knots. J. Geophys. Res. 69, 51615179. Phillips O. M., 1958 The equilibrium range in the spectrum of windgenerated waves. J. Fluid Mech. 4, 426434. Pierson W. J. and Moskowitz L., 1964 A proposed spectral form for fully developed waves based on the similarity theory of S. A. Kitaigorodskii. J. Geophys. Res. 69, 51815190.
152
153
P(~I w ) d w 
v/27rm exp
2m0
dw.
(5.1)
Before proving this property let us get a deeper insight into the meaning of the two above m e n t i o n e d probabilities. The first one [probability that ~7(t) of a given realization falls within the fixed small interval] is equal to the quotient between the time in which ~/is between w and w + dw and the total time [see fig. 5.1]. The second one [probability that ~l(to) at a fixed to in a realization chosen at r a n d o m falls within the fixed small interval] is equal to the quotient between the n u m b e r of realizations
Fig. 5.1 p (~7= w)dw is the probability that the surface displacement falls in the small interval w, w + dw. It is equal to the quotient between the summation (dtl + dt2 + ...) and the total time.
154
Chapter 5
in which the surface displacement r/at time to is within (w, w + dw) and the total number of realizations. Now let us see how equation (5.1) is achieved. First, let us consider two arbitrary random variables V1 and V2. If
= v2 v,, (5.2)
that reads "if the mean value of the nth power of V1 is equal to the mean value of the nth power of 1/2, whichever the n", then the two variables have the same probability density function, that is
p (v, = w) = p (v2 = w). (5.3)
This rather intuitive property which proceeds formally from the theorem of moments will enable us to prove (5.1). Before the proof of (5.1), it is also worth specifying that we shall adopt two different symbols for the mean value: one for the temporal mean, the other for the ensemble average. Specifically, < ~Tn(t)> will denote the mean value of the nth power of ~7(t) in a given realization of the process; and r/" (to) will denote the mean value of the nth power of ~7 at the fixed time to. 5.1.2
.'T ~ oc ~
aicos(aJit + ei)14 d
t  N~ NZ N~ NZ
i=1 j=l m=l n=l
aiajaman"
l i m 1 1 ..7 COS (edit .71_ei ) COS ((,ujt Jr ~j) COS (tOm t b em)COS ((Unt Jr e~) dt. .'7+oo , ~ J0
(5.4)
0.,)n
Besides the four assumptions of sect. 4.2, we assume (.z)i O,)j _Jr_O.)m + only a sufficient condition for the proof) and hence we have
.,7+oo7
(this being
lim
_1 ifijCmn 4 _ _ 3 if i  j  m  n ,
8 = 0 otherwise, and (5.4) reduces itself to
< ?74 ( t ) > 3
or
imT~jn
or
inCjm,
= /= 1 (jT~i)
Ni~l ~
71
(5.5)
155
H e r e the assumptions of sect. 4.2 on N and a i come into play (N being infinitely large, a i being of the same order of one another). U n d e r these hypotheses, (5.5) can be rewritten in the form
N N
<r/4(t)>3~Z
i=1 j=l
1 a~ aj2 ~
(5.6)
Now, assuming that (5.1) is actually the probability of the surface displacement, we get the same value of < r/4 (t) >:
< ~]4(t) > 
+oc (x)
w4p(rl
w)
dw
V/27rm0
~ w 4exp
w2 ) 2 m 0 dw  3m2"
By the same way of reasoning we can prove that, w h a t e v e r the n, < rl"(t) > takes on the same value if evaluated from equation (4.1) of r/(t) or from equation (5.1) of the probability of r/(t). If n is odd the proof is trivial, indeed it can be readily verified that < ~7"(t) > is zero w h e t h e r one proceeds from (4.1) or from (5.1). The proof is trivial also for n = 2: from (4.1) we obtain < r/2(t)> = m0, and the same result proceeds from (5.1). The first nontrivial proof, for which the assumption N , oc is needed, is the one concerning < r/4(t) > which we have given in this section. The proofs pertaining to < ~]6 (t) >, < r/8 (t) > and so on are like the proof for < r]4(t) >. The fact that < r/" (t) > obtained from (4.1) = < r/~ (t) > obtained from (5.1) implies that (5.1) is actually the probability of r/(t). Let us verify the step from (5.5) to (5.6) for the particular case in which all the a i are equal to each other, that is ai =a Vi.
3 (N 2 _N)a In this case, the r.h.s of (5.5) is equal to ~ 4 _k__~Na4
Vn
(to) =
/14
.
(5.7)
156 H e r e it is c o n v e n i e n t to define
gi 
Chapter 5
('Uito + C i   2 7 r i n t [ ( c ~ i t o
+ ci)/27r],
where
(5.8)
G i v e n that gi, like ei, are uniformly distributed in (0,270 and are stochastically i n d e p e n d e n t of one another, we have
_1_
4
COSgi COSg] COSgm COSgn _ 3
if i = j = / = m = n if i = j = m = n , otherwise,
or
i=mCj=n
or
i=n=/=j=m,
(5.9)
8 0
f/4(to)  3 Z
i=1 j=l(j:i)
1 22 ~ a i a j + /.~ 1 3 ~ a4 i"
r/4(t) > .
which implies that the probability of ~7(to) (relevant to the e n s e m b l e at a fixed time instant) is equal to the probability of ~7(t) relevant to any given realization. Check (5.9). If i j m n, you obtain
COS~i COSCjCOS~mCOS~n

where 1/(27r) 4 is the joint probability density function p ( g /  Wl, gj  w2, em = w3, Ym  W4). Then you can easily verify that also the terms with i  j  m n and i  j  m n are zero.
Analysis of the sea states: the time domain A s to the t e r m s with i = j ~= m = n t h e y give COSgi COSg/COSgm COSgn  COS2gi COS2gm I2~rj2u
0 0
157
1
(27T) 2' COS2 w l COS2W2 d w 2 d w l
1
 4 '
where 1/(2rc) 2 is the joint probability density function p(gi = Wl, g~ = w2). Finally, the terms with i = j = m = n give
COSCi  COSgj COSg m COSg n  COS4gi  
0 2re
COS 4 W 1
dw1 
3 ,
where 1/2re is the probability density function p(g~ = wl). 5.1.4 The process is ergodic Really, r/(t) of a sea state is a stationary ergodic Gaussian random process. The fact is that generally we omit the attribute ergodic, both because the attributes here are a good deal, and because the term ergodic is not very familiar. In simple words, the process is stationary Gaussian since p [r/(to) = w] at any fixed time to is given by (5.1), and is ergodic Gaussian since p [r/(t) = w] in any realization is given by (5.1). To better understand this concept, we give an example of a stationary Gaussian process being not ergodic, and an example of an ergodic Gaussian process being not stationary. Let us consider the process
~]i (t) = Vi,
where the i th realization is a constant function of time, with the value of the constant being generally different for each realization. If the ~ are distributed according to (5.1), that is if P (V  w) 1 exp v/2rcm0 2too
the random process is stationary Gaussian but not ergodic. Let us consider now a stationary ergodic Gaussian process and let us imagine to bring the origin of each realization to coincide with a zero of r/. Thus, our process keeps ergodic Gaussian, but it is no longer stationary since p [~ (0) = w] is given by a delta function rather than by (5.1).
158
Chapter 5
For example
V1  rl(to),
where the dot denotes the derivative, and to is any fixed time instant and T, T' are fixed time lags. The product
p (V1 =
dw2
...
represents the probability that V1 falls in a fixed small interval dw~ including Wl; V2 falls in a fixed small interval dw2 including w2, and so on. In sect. 5.1 we have proved that p[rl(to) = w] is a Gaussian (normal) probability density function. Expanding the reasoning from the probability density of a single variable to the joint probability density of a set of random variables, we can prove that p (V1 = Wl, V2  w2, ..., V, = w,) is multivariate Gaussian, that is to say
p (1/1 = Wl, v~ = w~, ..., v, = w,) =
' (5.10)
where Mq and M are, respectively, the i, j cofactor and the determinant of the covariance matrix of V1, V2, ..., V,:
v~ VlV~ v~
... ...
VlV.~ v~v.
, o . o
Mq  i, j cofactor, M _= determinant of
v~
v.v~
v.
...
v ~ j
n
The elements of this matrix are ensemble averages like r/4 (to) obtained in sect. 5.1. Since the ensemble averages are equal to the temporal means, the elements of the covariance matrix can be obtained also from temporal means. This approach is advisable. 5.2.2 H o w
to get a c o v a r i a n c e m a t r i x
We seek the covariance matrix of rl(to), il(to) which will be applied later (as usual, to is any fixed time). The result is
il(to)rl(to)
i72 (to)
0)
m2
159
Here, apart from the 1,1 entry that is simply the variance of the surface displacement, the other elements proceed from the following operations
Tl(to)il(to)  < ~l(t) il(t) >  ~ o
aicos(a;it + ei)
a j ~ s i n ( ~ j t + cj) d t 
 i=1 ]=1
aiaj~j ~
<
(t) > 
,7
1 j. E
o

aiwisin
( w i t + ei)
dt

~ ~
i=1 j=l
m2.
(5.12)
In these equations, we have understood that .~Ztends to infinity; we have used the fact that the mean value of sin (~it + ci) sin ( ~ t + cj) is i if i  j or else is 0, and the 2 fact that the mean value of cos (~it + Gi) sin ( ~ t + cj) is always 0. Check the rightmost equality (5.12). Hint: start from the question "which is the contribution to the summation from the small waves whose frequency ~i is within a fixed small interval ~, ~ + 8~ ?". Then, use the definition (4.2) of spectrum and the definition (4.6) of moments of the spectrum. The reasoning is essentially the same we did for the summation on the r.h.s, of (4.13).
Let us define now p+ (b, w) dt dw, the probability that (i) the small interval (  d t / 2 , dt/2) includes a b+ ; (ii) the derivative of ~/at the time of this b+ falls within a fixed small interval
w, w + d w .
160
Chapter 5
l
~
1 st c r e s t e l e v a t i o n
> b
2 nd c r e s t e l e v a t i o n
> b
.....
...........
....
....
L ....
.k. . . . . . . . . . . .
t ~,
i ......... i.
i......
....
Fig. 5.2 A b+ is an upcrossing of some fixed threshold b. The relation between p+ (b) and p+ (b, w) proceeds straightforwardly from their definitions:
p+(b) 
I+
o
p+(b,w)dw.
(5.14)
The joint probability of (i) and (ii) is equal to the probability that (iii) r](0) falls within ( b   ~ 1  dtw, b + l ~ dtw)" , (iv) ~)(0) falls within (w, w + dw). Fig. 5.3 is helpful to understand this equality, that is to say it is helpful to understand that probability of (i) and (ii) = probability of (iii) and (iv). (5.15) In an analytical form this equality is
p+(b,w)
(5.16)
Finally, equations (5.13), (5.14), and (5.16) taken together yield ~+ (b; ~ )
_
~1
.... m
m2 exp 0
2m 0
g.
(5.17)
This is a result with some important consequences, as we shall see in the rest of this chapter. But before we see these consequences, it is worth making some remarks on the crucial step of our reasoning, that is to say, on equality (5.15).
161
JT _1
Ldtd
Fig. 5.3 The probability that the small interval (  d t / 2 , dt/2) contains a b+ of the surface displacement with a derivative b e t w e e n w and w + dw is equal to the probability that, at t = 0, the surface d i s p l a c e me n t falls b e t w e e n b  1  w dt and b +  1 w dt and its derivative falls b e t w e e n w 2 2 and w + dw.
(5.18)
and the derivative of the random function f/ at this instant falls between w and w + dw, with w > O. It follows that rl(O) = b  wSt, (5.19a) w  / ) ( 0 ) 8t < / / ( 0 ) < w  / ) ( 0 ) 8t + dw. (5.19b)
The two pairs of inequalities (5.18) and (5.19b) and the equality (5.19a) imply
(5.20a) (5.20b)
Since the small intervals dt and dw are independent of each other, we can take dt so small that i/) (0) 1dt dw
0,
(5.21)
162
Chapter 5
so that the inequality (5.20b) reduces itself to w <//(0) < w + dw. (5.22)
Conclusion: having assumed the occurrence of both event (i) and event (ii) we have proved that the events (iii) and (iv) occur too. Indeed the pair of inequalities (5.20a) describe just the event (iii) and the pair of inequalities (5.22) describe just the event (iv). The proof is valid under the assumption (5.21) on dt and dw. Through a similar reasoning we can also verify the converse: if the events (iii) and (iv) occur, then the events (i) and (ii) also occur, provided that dt and dw satisfy condition (5.21). Hence, the relation (5.15) between the probability of (i) and (ii) and the probability of (iii) and (iv) is proved under the assumption that dt and dw satisfy condition (5.21). This proof is sufficient. Indeed, the probability of (i) and (ii) is proportional to the product dt dw, and also the probability of (iii) and (iv) is proportional to dt dw. Therefore if one succeeds in proving (as we have done) that for a particular pair dt, dw the probability of (i) and (ii) is equal to the probability of (iii) and (iv), then it follows that the two probabilities are equal to each other whichever the pair dt, dw. It is as if we had proved that a prism with a small base dA and a relatively large height dh of a homogeneous material @ has the same weight of a prism of the same base dA and height dh of a homogeneous material @, and hence we should have concluded that, given any volume with a shape generally different from the prism, the weight of this volume of material @ and the weight of this volume of material (2) are equal to each other. Clearly, in this comparison, the volume of small base dA and relatively large height dh stands for dt dw, with dt and dw satisfying condition (5.21); the weight of the volume of material @ stands for the probability of (i) and (ii); the weight of the volume of material @ stands for the probability of (iii) and
(iv).
(bearing in mind that the number of waves is equal to the number of zero upcrossings). With (5.17) of ~ + ( b ; 3 ) , (5.23) becomes T  27r,/mo V m2 that is the formula of the mean period. (5.24)
Analysis of the sea states: the time domain With the J O N S W A P spectrum we have
163
Ag2ajp 4
mo m2
Ag ~2(.j2 p
i [
oo
oo
~(w) dw
o
c .... w2 { (w) dw
TTp
J w
o
dw
The two integrals can be numerically evaluated for given values of the shape parameters ~ and ~)~2 in the expression of ~ (w), and with the values of the mean J O N S W A P spectrum (~1 = 3.3, X2 = 0.08) the result is
k
T  0.78 Tp.
(5.25)
Hence, with the formula (4.27) of Tp we obtain T  6.6~r~/H' 4g 5.5.2 The general inequality o f the crest elevation probability If a wave has a crest higher than a fixed threshold b then it contains at least a b+ [cf. fig. 5.2]. Hence, the number of waves whose crest exceeds a fixed threshold b is smaller than or equal to the number of b+. Only if the spectrum is infinitely narrow the waves approach the sinusoidal function so that there is only one local maximum per wave, which implies: the number of wave crests higher than a fixed threshold b is equal to the number of b+, for every b. Summarizing, we write .A+ (b;J) ~/~:r(b;.~) if the spectrum is infinitely narrow, (5.27) (5.26)
where A'c~ (b; .'.7) is the number of waves whose crest exceeds a fixed threshold b, in a very large time .~, and ./f'+ (b; .U) is the number of b+ in the interval .U, which has been already defined. The probability P ( U > b) of a wave with a crest elevation exceeding a fixed threshold b is equal to the quotient between .A'~r(b; .~Z) and .A'+ (0; 7 ) (this being equal to the number of waves), that is
b)=.4;
(0; 3).
(5.28)
164
Chapter 5
From (5.27) and (5.28) it follows that P(g~ > b) f~4~+ ( b ; 3 ) / ~ _< ~ (0; 3 ) if the spectrum is infinitely narrow, in general;
( <_exp(b2/2mo)
The nondimensional form
in general.
(5.29b)
P(/3) = exp(/32/2)
(5.30)
proceeding from (5.29a) gives the probability that a wave crest in a stationary Gaussian process with an infinitely narrow spectrum is higher than /3 times the standard deviation of this process (with/3 being arbitrarily fixed). It will be used later in the analysis of the wave forces on ocean structures.
5.5.3 The wave height probability under the assumption of infinitely narrow
spectrum
We have just recalled that a single wave approaches a sinusoidal function if the spectrum is infinitely narrow. Another consequence of this is that the wave height is twice the crest elevation. Therefore P(wave height > H )  P ~ >  ~  ) which yields P(wave height > H)  exp ('2) 8m0 if the spectrum is infinitely narrow. (5.31) ifthe spectrum is infinitely narrow,
This is one of the more commonly applied called Rayleigh distribution. It gives the heights under the assumption of infinitely In what follows we shall express (5.31)
expressions in ocean engineering; the so probability of exceedance of the wave narrow spectrum. in the alternative form
h,
where P (H;/4= = h) is the probability of a wave height exceeding a fixed threshold H, in a sea state with a given significant wave height. For the step from (5.31) to (5.32) it suffices to use the definition/4= = 4xFm~.
165
Besides the probability of exceedance, we shall use also the probability density function p ( H ; H, = h) that is related to the probability of exceedance by p (H; 14,  h)   dP (H; H,  h) . dH (5.33)
Clearly, the product p (H; H~ = h ) d H gives the probability of a wave height within the fixed small interval H , H + d H , in a sea state with a given significant wave height. Equation (5.32) and (5.33) yield p (H; H,  h)  4  ~ exp  2 if the spectrum is infinitely narrow. (5.34)
Finally, for the experimental verification of the wave height distribution the nondimensional form
P(a)
exp(~/
(5.35)
is commonly used. It gives the probability that the quotient between the wave height and the root mean square surface displacement of the sea state exceeds any fixed threshold a. Here we use the simplest symbol [P(a)] because this is the probability most commonly used in dealing with field measurements. 5.5.4 T h e g e n e r a l inequality o f the m e a n w a v e h e i g h t
The mean crest elevation The mean value of a random nonnegative variable is equal to the integral over (0, ~ ) of the probability of exceedance [see sect. 5.10.3]. In particular the mean crest elevation is given by
J
so that using (5.29ab) we obtain
The mean trough depth The stationary Gaussian process is statistically symmetrical, which means in particular the mean trough depth to be equal to the mean crest elevation:
~(!= ~.
166
Chapter 5
For verifying this equality is suffices to note that the process r/(t) is also stationary Gaussian and that the troughs of r/(t) are the crests of  ~ ( t ) (from which the symbol ~ (  / t h a t stands for crest elevation of the process r/(t)).
The mean wave height
For getting the mean wave height we should perform the following operation
B_ + + ... + H .
(5.37)
w h e r e / / 1 is the height of the first wave of the sea state, H2 the height of the second wave, and so on as far as H, being the height of the last wave. For the wave definition, (5.37) can be rewritten in the form
/_/_
+ + +
/7
+ ... +
(5.38)
indeed the wave height is the sum of the crest elevation and the trough depth. From (5.36) and (5.38) it follows that H fv/~~ if the spectrum is infinitely narrow, (5.39a) (5.39b)
Put into words, this means that the mean wave height is generally smaller than v / ~ x/~m~and becomes equal to v / ~ v/N~ in the limit as the bandwidth approaches zero.
167
For the probability of a wave height within a fixed small interval H, H + d H we should estimate the probability that the following events jointly occur: (i) a fixed small interval (to, to + dt) contains a 0+; (ii) a fixed small interval (to + T, to + T + d T ) contains a 0+; (iii) a fixed small interval (to + T', t,, + T' + dT'), with T' < T, contains a local maximum with an elevation between b and b + db (b and db fixed, b < H); (iv) a fixed small interval (to + T", to + T" + d T " ) , with T' < T" < T, contains a local minimum with an elevation between b  H  d H and b  H; (v) no other 0+ occurs on (t~,, to + T); (vi) no other local maximum with an elevation greater than b occurs on (to, to + T); (vii) no other local minimum with an elevation smaller than b  H occurs on
(to, t o + T ) .
Dividing the joint probability of the seven events (i) ... (vii) by the probability of (i) we should obtain the probability of a wave with a height within (H, H + dH), period within (T, T + d T), crest elevation within (b, b + d b ) , interval between the first zero upcrossing and the crest within (T', T' + dT'), interval between the first zero upcrossing and the trough within (T", T " + d T"). Then integrating this probability over
5.7 The period of a very high wave and the wave height probability under general bandwidth assumptions
5.7.1 Elements o f the quasideterminism
theory
Let us consider the set of the waves with a given height H, say H = 3a in a stationary Gaussian process. (Really, the probability to find a wave height being exactly equal to 3~ is zero, and thus it is understood that we fix a small interval d H and take the set of the waves whose height is between H and H + dH, specifically between 3a and 3 a + dH.) The waves of this set will be different, even very different, from one another.
168
Chapter 5
If we fixed a larger H, say H  8cr, we should find that the waves contained in the set differ much less from one another and, in the limit as H/cr ~ oc, all waves of the set, apart from a negligible share, would prove to be equal to one another. More specifically, each wave of the set would occupy the centre of a well defined group that is the sum of a deterministic framework and a residual r a n d o m noise of a smaller order. The form of the deterministic component is ~(T)  ~ ( T )  ~ , ( T  T*) H (0)  ~(T*) 2 ' (5.40)
where T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum, being assumed to be also the first minimum, of the autocovariance. With the J O N S W A P spectrum, the deterministic group (5.40) becomes
/w/{cos Io/W/{lcos( w ,
This is shown in fig. 5.4 for the case of the m e a n J O N S W A P spectrum (X~ = 3.3, X2 = 0.08), for which T* proves to be equal to 0.44Tp. This is a short summary of the quasideterminism theory. This theory deals with the mechanics of the wind generated waves, and hence it will be shown later (chapter 9). But the quasideterminism theory has also two important consequences on wave statistics, that is on the subject of this chapter. 5.7.2 P e r i o d Th o f a very h i g h w a v e The first consequence of the quasideterminism theory is that a wave of given height H has a well defined period, with a probability approaching 1, as H/cr ~ oc. This is Th  period of the central wave of the group (5.40), (5.41) where the subscript h stands for high waves. With the m e a n J O N S W A P spectrum, Th can be simply taken from fig. 5.4:
Th 0.92Tp
(5.42)
Clearly, the limit as H/cr , oc of the regression T (H) of wave periods versus wave heights coincides with Th" lim T (H)  Th,
H I ~ ,
and hence it can be calculated by means of (5.41) for any given spectrum. This is very useful since the numerical simulations of the stationary Gaussian process re
169
f~/3 ,7(o)
f~
=:0.92
Tp ~ I
r/rp
2
1
2
~ 1
Fig. 5.4 The function (5.40) obtained from the mean J O N S W A P spectrum.
veal that T (H) converges on its limit for H/a > 4 " 5, and the periods of the waves with H/a > 7 8 are typically very close to this limit. 5.7.3 The wave height probability under general bandwidth assumptions The second consequence of the quasideterminism theory, in the field of wave statistics, deals with the very wave height probability. Let us see how quasideterminism theory and wave height probability are related to each other. A wave of given height H necessarily has crest elevation and trough depth between 0 and H. Fig. 5.5a shows two possibilities. These possibilities are oc 2 because the crest elevation can take on any value between 0 and H and the time interval between the crest and the trough can take on any positive value. The situation is more suitably represented in the plane T~, where T is the cresttrough lag, and ~ is the quotient between the crest elevation and the cresttotrough wave height. In particular the two waves @ and @ of fig. 5.5a are represented by two distinct points in the plane 7~ [see fig. 5.5b]. Let us imagine we examine a very large time interval ~ , we gather all waves whose height is within a fixed small interval H, H + dH, and we mark the points representative of these waves in the plane T~. For a finite H/cr the marked points would spread over the plane T~. [For example, the number of points falling in rectangles like A or B (see fig. 5.5b) in general would not be negligible.] On the contrary, as H/c ~ oc we would look at a great concentration: all the points but a negligible share would fall in an open 2ball with centre at T* 1 and radius of order (H/c) ~. Moreover all the points in this small 2ball would be associated with waves whose profile is very close to the deterministic profile (5.40). In partial confirmation of this, the wave of given height H very large, according to (5.40), has crest elevation H/2 and cresttrough lag T*, and thus it is represented by the point T*, 2 1 . m the plane ~~.
' 2
170
Chapter 5
(a)
"g'2
@
I" .33 =.75
(0)
/.
IAI
T*
'black hole'
Fig. 5.5 (a) The waves with a fixed height H generally show a large variety of ~ and r. (b) Plotting ~ vs r, generally we get a wide cloud of points. Only in the limit as H I e + ~ , all points would gather at a special location, something like a black hole. This special location is at 1
~ = T*, , ~  ~.
If we associated a mass with each point in the plane r  ~ (the same mass for each point), in the case of a finite H / o we should find the mass rather uniformly distributed over the plane 7~. While as H/cr ~ ~ , the whole mass but a negligible share would pile up at point T* 1
' 2'
hole. The mass density would vary widely in the black hole, despite its radius being very small, in the order of ( H / a ) ~. Specifically, the mass density would approach zero from the centre to the outskirts of the black hole. All this will be formally proved in chap. 9. Moreover in sect. 9.10.1 we shall count all the points being present in the black hole. That is to say, we shall integrate the number of points over a small 2ball with a radius of order ( H / a ) ~ and centre at point T*, ~.1 Clearly, once we shall have obtained the number of points, that is the 2 number of waves whose height falls within the fixed small interval H , / 4 + dH, during
Analysis of the sea states: the time domain the very large time interval 7 , probability. The result is
171
Kexp
(5.43)
where K depends on the quotient between the absolute minimum and the absolute maximum of ~b(T), and on the quotient of the curvatures of these maximum and minimum. Its value is equal to 1.21 for the Pierson and Moskowitz spectrum, 1.15 for the mean J O N S W A P spectrum, and naturally is 1 for the infinitely narrow spectrum. The form (5.43) has been compared with the data of numerical simulations of stationary Gaussian processes, and for the processes with the characteristic spectra of sea waves, (5.43) proves to be efficient for greater than 3 + 4 (we shall see this in more details in sect. 9.10.4). For 6, which is the range of practical interest for ocean engineering, the effect of K proves to be negligible. This means that for > 6 we can assume K = 1, that is
H/cr H/o>
H/c~
(5.44)
This, without any appreciable consequence, in the sense that for a given P we get practically the same H whether using (5.43) or (5.44) (provided, of course, that > 6). Therefore we can use (5.44) for the practical applications. We can use it in the alternative form
H,/c~
P(H;H,h)exp[l+~b*4 (~) 2]
or in the form P(c~)  exp L2 ] 4(1 +~b*)
(5.45)
(5.46)
which gives the probability that the quotient mean square surface displacement of the sea Another useful formula is that of the proceeds from the probability of exceedance
between a wave height and the root state exceeds any fixed threshold c~. probability density function, which through (5.33), and proves to be 4 (__~_)21 1 + ~b* " (5.47)
8 H [ p (H;/4,  h)  1 + ~* h 2 exp
It should be noted that the forms (5.444546) of the probability of exceedance reduce themselves correctly to (5.313235), and the form (5.47) of the probability density function reduces itself to (5.34), if the spectrum is infinitely narrow so that ~*=1. Finally, it is useful to get the expressions of the probability of exceedance and of the probability density function, for the case of the mean J O N S W A P spectrum. We
172
Chapter 5
have already seen in sect. 4.7.4 that the ~b* of this spectrum is equal to 0.73, and hence:
P ( H ; H ,  h )  exp [2.31 ( ~ ) 2 ] ,
mean J O N S W A P spectrum p (H;/4,  h)  4.62 ~
(5.48a) (5.48b)
exp 2.31
Hi Ticr '
Ti Th "
The operations (i)... (vii) can be ~ p e a t e d for an arbitrarily large number of wave records, and the sets of pairs ai, T/of the different sea states can be gathered so as to make up a single big set. The sea states can be recorded in different areas, and under environmental conditions which are even very different from one another. Only one must take care to discard the sea states where the absolute minimum of ~b(T) is not also the first local minimum on the positive domain of this function (it is something that may happen if the wind waves are superimposed on some slightly higher swells as was shown in sect. 4.7.5). In order to verify the theor)L we have to draw two~ graphs. The first one is the representation on the plane a  T of all the pairs c~i, T/. The result, as evident, will be a point cloud. For the second graph we have to work only on the nondimensional values c~i, from which we get the experimental P(c~). Let us imagine, for example, we have 10 5 values of OL i and that 2 . 1 0 3 of these Og i exceed the threshold c~  5, then P(5) 2.103 IOT=2 . 1 0 2 .
173
It is convenient to resort to a semilogarithmic coordinate paper where the functions (5.35) and (5.46) are represented by two parabolas. Indeed from these two functions we have respectively In ~ = P
1 c~
2
l In ~ P
We shall represent the experimental P (c~) (obtained from the set of the c~i) and the two functions (5.35) and (5.46). As to ~* (which is necessary for 5.46), we shall take the average of the ~* in the set of wave records. 5.8.2 Graphs obtained from field data Basing ourselves on the theory of sect. 5.7 we expect that the ordinates of the rightmost points c~, T of the first graph are close to 1. (Indeed the rightmost points are those with the largest c~ = H/o, and in sect. 5.7.2 we have seen that a wave with a very large H/cr must have a period T very close to Th, and hence a nondimensional period T very close to 1.) We also expect that the experimental P(c~) approaches the function (5.46) as c~ grows. An apparent confirmation of both the predictions is given by figs. 5.67 being obtained from the data of the experiment R C 1990. Typically, the point cloud c~, T appears as in fig. 5.6, with the m a x i m u m width roughly on c~ = 2. As to the P (c~), we see the data points for small c~ to be practically coincident with the function (5.35). Then, for c~ > 3, the data points deviate gradu
Fig. 5.6 Data points T~ = T~/Th, o~i= Hi/o obtained from the experiment RC 1990. We see that the T of the highest waves are very close to 1.
174
Chapter 5
p= probability of exceedance
10 4
~.(5.46)~~
eq.(. 5)
103
102
101
10
Fig. 5.7 Probability P(a) obtained from the experiment RC 1990. We see that the form (5.46) for increasing a.
P(a) approaches
ally from (5.35) and move towards (5.46). Starting from a = 4, the data points are practically coincident with the function (5.46). This implies that the experimental P(a) all over its domain is smaller than or equal to (5.35), which confirms also the inequality (5.39b) on the mean wave height (bearing in mind that the mean value of a nonnegative random variable is equal to the integral from 0 to ~ of its probability of exceedance). 5.8.3
Nonlinearity effects
In conclusion, the theory of the sea states to the first order in a Stokes' expansion enables us to foresee the basic things on wave height and wave period variability. This does not mean that a sea state is wholly a stationary Gaussian process, as predicted by the aforesaid theory. Indeed this theory is not able to predict the profile distortion due to the nonlinearity effects. Going into detail, in an actual sea state, the probability of exceedance of the crest elevation is generally different from the probability of exceedance of the trough depth; for the surface waves, the probability of exceedance of the crest elevation is greater than the probability of exceedance of the trough depth; viceversa for the pressure head waves beneath the water surface. Hence, there is an apparent difference with respect to the stationary Gaussian processes which are statistically symmetrical.
175
On the other hand, as we have seen, there is an excellent agreement between sea states and Gaussian process for what concerns the wave height probability. The reason for this agreement is that the nonlinearity affects the crest elevation and the trough depth, but does not affect the cresttotrough wave height. Similarly, the nonlinearity shortens the wave crest and lengthens the wave trough, but does not affect the wave period. 5.8.4
A firm landmark
Sometimes the Italians dream about setting their watches to train departures. Well, something like this does actually occur at sea; the wave height probability is usually so regular that we can use it to check the wave gauges. In the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria, we resort to graphs like that of fig. 5.7 for a general check of the wave gauges. An emblematic case occurred in 1990 with a few capacitance wave staffs. The experimental P(c~) looked somewhat different from that of fig. 5.7, in the sense that the data points slightly deviated rightward with respect to the function (5.35). This made us think of a gauge's flaw, and in fact a few laboratory tests revealed that these gauges had some small departures from linearity.
Let us fix a number . 7 between 0 and 1: 0 <.~7. < 1, and let us define H~  the threshold being exceeded by .~7. N wave heights in a sea state (N being the total number of waves). This definition is simply expressed by the equality
P (H, j;Hsh).~,
that, with the formula (5.32) for the probability of exceedance, yields H7  h Then let us define HT  the average wave height of the .. N highest waves of a sea state. in ./~ .
Chapter 5
HT=
J J
=h
1 1 In S +  ~ A
1 ( 1  erf ~ / / l n  ~ ) ] , (5.49)
where the err function has been already used in chap. 3 [cf. the definition (3.37)]. Check the rightmost equality (5.49). Use (5.34) of p ( H ; H , = h), and note that the integral on the denominator is equal to 3, and the integral on the numerator can be evaluated by parts.
5.9.2 Analytical exercise: find a well approximate formula for the direct
evaluation of H 7
Equation (5.49) gives the exact solution for H#. But it has the inconvenience of containing the erf function that requires a numerical integration. Thus let us seek an approximate formula of quick use. The function 1 erfx/x appearing in (5.49) satisfies the following pair of inequalities
SI(X ) _ 1 ~  e x (x y1
13) XT
3 3
"
(5.50)
1 S2 (X) _1 ~ e x (x Y
1xy+ x2 7
}im SI(X)  0,
&(x)  O,
and that {__~ $2 (x)    ~ 1 e
(5.51)
Analysis of the sea states: the time domain The equalities (5.51) and (5.52) imply also that lim 1  err v/x = 1, lim 1  err x/~ = 1.
177
As x takes on smaller and smaller values, the difference between 1  erfx/~ and $1 (x) or $2 (x) progressively grows. However for x > 1, the function 1  erfx/~ can be very well fitted by an intermediate function between $1 (x) and $2 (x). Specifically, the form 1x _3 1 x  } ) for x > 1 1 e_X x l~   ~+ 41  erfv~   ~ 2 proves to be efficient. This approximate form enables us to rewrite (5.49) as
/!~ ~ h
x+~
(x  In 1 ) .~2"
(5.53)
5.9.3 The bandwidth effect Equation (5.49) and its approximate form (5.53) are valid provided the spectrum is infinitely narrow, since we have used formula (5.34) for p (H; H, = h). If we use formula (5.47) valid for an arbitrary bandwidth, we obtain again (5.49) (and 5.53) multiplied by the factor V/(1 + ~*)/2. Thus the characteristic height He is generally smaller than it is predicted by (5.49) or (5.53): the b r o a d e r the spectrum the smaller the characteristic height. In particular, with the m e a n J O N S W A P spectrum, H 7 proves to be 7% smaller than is predicted by (5.49) or (5.53). But H 7 has come into use under the assumption of infinitely narrow spectrum, and whenever some design rules prescribe H1/3,//1/10, H1/loo it is understood that these are H1/3, H~/~o, H~/~oo for the infinitely narrow spectrum.
5.10 T h e m a x i m u m e x p e c t e d w a v e h e i g h t in a s e a state o f g i v e n d u r a t i o n
5.10.1 The stochastic independence of the wave heights and its consequences
on the result
Let us consider N consecutive waves of a sea state of given significant height. The probability that the largest wave height of this set of N waves is smaller than a given threshold H is equal to the probability that all N wave heights are smaller than H. (Indeed if the maximum wave height g m a x is smaller than H, then all wave heights are smaller than H; and if all wave heights are smaller than H, then also Hmax is smaller than H.) Thus we can write
(5.54)
178
Chapter 5
In literature the probability on the r.h.s, of this equation is expressed in the form
.@(HI <
(5.55)
that would be exact if the wave heights were stochastically independent of one another. Indeed (5.55) says that the joint probability that HI is smaller than H, H2 is smaller than H, and so on is equal to the probability that HI is smaller than H multiplied by the probability that H2 is smaller than H, and so on. Really, the wave heights are n o t stochastically independent of one another, and hence it is necessary to reflect upon (5.55). It is convenient to consider first the condition of infinitely narrow spectrum. In this case, if N is finite, the N consecutive waves have only some infinitesimal differences from one another [cf. sect. 4.7.1]. Therefore the probability that all N waves are smaller than H is equal to the probability that one single wave is smaller than H: ~ ( H 1 < H , H2 < H , ...,HN < H; H, = h) = 1  P ( H ; if the spectrum is infinitely narrow.
H, = h)
As a consequence, if the spectrum was infinitely narrow, using (5.55) we would largely underestimate the probability that all the wave heights are smaller than H, that is we would overestimate largely the probability that Hma x is greater than H, which means that our estimate would be conservative. If the spectrum has a finite bandwidth like that of the sea wave spectra, using (5.55) we make an error of the same kind, i.e. a conservative one, but much smaller. The quasideterminism theory helps us to understand why. Indeed it shows that the characteristic wave groups consist of three or four consecutive waves [see the pictures of these groups in chap. 10]. Before and after groups, we can find everything: a sequence of small random waves or even a new group. In other words the three or four waves forming the group are statistically independent from the preceding and the following ones. On the contrary, the three or four waves of the group are obviously not stochastically independent of one another. In practice, this implies that given an exceptionally high wave (centre of a group) we can expect that one or two waves before and one or two waves after will also be higher than the mean wave height. To summarize, with the characteristic spectra of the sea waves we have a correlation affecting sequences of three or four consecutive waves, and this is not even a full correlation in the sense that the three or four waves do not have the same height; with the infinitely narrow spectrum, the correlation is full and affects the whole set of N waves. Thus we understand that the greater the N the more efficient is the assumption of stochastic independence, and for N of a few hundred this assumption will lead to only a small conservative error. In conclusion, equation (5.55), assuming the stochastic independence of the wave heights, is efficient for engineering purposes, since it is simple and slightly conservative.
Analysis of the sea states: the time domain 5.10.2 The formula for the m a x i m u m expected wave height E q u a t i o n s (5.54) and (5.55) yield r(Hmax > H; H , h)  1  [1  P(H; 14,  h)] N
179
(5.56)
which leads us at once to the m a x i m u m expected wave height Hma x in a sequence of N waves. F o r a physical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of Hmax, let us suppose to take n sets each of N consecutive waves from the same sea state. The first set will have a m a x i m u m wave height Hm~x~, the second set will have a m a x i m u m wave height Hmax2generally different from Hmaxt, and so on as far as the nth set whose m a x i m u m wave height will be Hmax,. The m a x i m u m expected wave height Hmax is the average of Hmaxl, gmax2, ..., Hmaxn. Since the m e a n value of a n o n n e g a t i v e r a n d o m variable like Hm~x is equal to the integral over (0, oc) of its probability of exceedance, from (5.56) we obtain Hmax P (Hmax > H ; / 4 ,  h) d H 11  exp 4 l+~b* dH (5.57)
El
exp
 ~ c4 ~ l+~b*
)l N
dc~,
(5.58)
where d _= H/h. The integrand on the r.h.s, of this e q u a t i o n is shown in fig. 5.8 for N = 200 and ~ * = 0.73 which is the value pertaining to the m e a n J O N S W A P spectrum. The integral is equal to 1.586 which implies the m a x i m u m expected wave height in a sequence of 200 waves to be equal to 1.586 times the significant wave height.
1.0
a~a=l.586
~'max=1.586
0.5
0.5
1.5
'
'2'.5
Fig. 5.8 ~max(N) proceeds from the integral of P(~max > C~) over (0, oc). Here N has been taken equal to 200.
180
Chapter 5
Usually we have to evaluate the m a x i m u m expected wave height in a sea state of given duration At. To this end equation (5.58) is used with NAt f(h~ ' (5.59)
and with the expression of T(h) obtained in sect. 5.5.1. Indeed A t / T ( h ) is the expected n u m b e r of waves in an interval At, in the given sea state. 5.10.3 A p p e n d i x :
the relation between mean value and probability exceedance o f a nonnegative r a n d o m variable
of
Let us consider a nonnegative random variable V. By p(V = x) dx we mean the probability that V takes on a value within a fixed small interval x,x + dx, and by P (V > x) we mean the probability that V takes on a value greater than a fixed x, so that
p ( V = x ) = 
dP(V > x) dx
Now, probably everybody knows that the mean value of V can be obtained through the relation Vx p (V  x) dx (5.60)
0
which is well documented in every book on probability and statistics, and is also quite easy to verify. Perhaps, it is less wellknown that the mean value of a nonnegative random variable can be readily evaluated from the probability of exceedance. Indeed, evaluating (by parts) the integral on the r.h.s, of (5.60), we obtain
V   x P(V > x)
0
x~ o o
+
0
P (V > x) dx,
from which, bearing in mind that limxP (V > x)  0 (this being a necessary condition for the existence of the mean value), it follows that
V0
Conclusive note The classic approach of Cartwright and LonguetHiggins (1956) proceeds from Rice's solution (194445) for the distribution of the elevations of the local maxima of a stationary Gaussian process. E q u a t i o n (5.32) is obtained as a corollary of this solution. Then a new solution by Rice (194445), the one for the expected n u m b e r per unit time of zero upcrossings, gives (5.24). In this chapter we have followed an alternative a p p r o a c h suggested by the a u t h o r (1982), which proceeds from Rice's solution (1958) for the expected n u m b e r per unit time of b upcrossings, where b is any fixed threshold. B o t h basic equations (5.24) and (5.32) are o b t a i n e d from this solution, and f u r t h e r m o r e also inequalities (5.29b) and (5.39b) are obtained which are valid for an arbitrary bandwidth.
181
T h e very typical discrepancy b e t w e e n data points and the R a y l e i g h distribution of wave heights was illustrated by H a r i n g et al. (1976) and Forristall (1978) and was definitively p o i n t e d out, and classified as a b a n d w i d t h effect, by L o n g u e t  H i g g i n s (1980).
References
Boccotti P., 1982 Relations between characteristic sea wave parameters. J. Geophys. Res. 87, 42674268. Cartwright D. E. and LonguetHiggins M. S., 1956 The statistical distribution of the maxima of a random function. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 237, 213232. Forristall G.Z., 1978 On the statistical distribution of wave heights in a storm. J. Geophys. Res. 83, 23532358. Haring R.E., Osborne A.R. and Spencer L.P. 1976 Extreme wave parameters based on continental shelf storm wave records. Proc. 15 th Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE. LonguetHiggins M.S., 1980 On the distribution of the heights of sea waves: some effects of nonlinearity and finite bandwidth. J. Geophys. Res. 85, 15191523. Rice S. O., 1944 Mathematical analysis of random noise. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 23, 282332; 1945 Mathematical analysis of random noise. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 24, 46156; 1958 Distribution of the duration of fades in radio transmission. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 37, 581635.
182
183
Chapter 6
THE WAVE CLIMATE
H~(t)
6.1.1 Measurements of H~
Let us imagine we take a continuous record of the surface displacement ~ (t) at a fixed site. We shall call H~ (t) the significant wave height of the sea state lasting from t  At/2 to t + A t / 2 : 
47 [
dtAt/2
where At is the duration of a sea state./4, (t) is a random continuous function that is gradually variable and has a mean value which depends on the site. The random function/4, (t) is not stationary because of a seasonal component. Moreover, it has a strong statistical asymmetry with respect to the mean. Some numerical simulations of this function have been recently presented by Cunha and Guedes Soares (1999). Usually the records of/4, (t) are taken by means of instrumented buoys with a At of 20 minutes. This is a rather large duration for a weak sea state (for example, with an H, of 0.5 m, we expect about 500 wind waves in 20 minutes). But we aim to get with more accuracy the/4, of the heavier sea states. Thus the choice of fixing a At of 20 minutes is justified and convenient. Usually, the records are intermittent. A typical way of working is: record of ~7(t) for a continuous duration of 20 minutes in three hours or in one hour, which means sampling/4, (t) at a rate of 1/3 per hour or 1 per hour. The data points of/4, (t) are then interpolated (e. g. resorting to a Fourier series) and the interpolation proves to be efficient because the function varies gradually. 6.1.2 Definition of sea storm From function/4, (t) we can single out the sea storms. Let us define a sea storm as "a sequence of sea states in which/4, (t) exceeds a fixed threshold herit , and does not
184
Chapter 6
fall below this threshold for a continuous time interval greater than 12 hours". As for hcrit w e suggest that we assume it is equal to 1.5 < Hs (t) >, that is 1.5 times the mean annual significant wave height. In practice, the one in fig. 6.1a is a single storm, and that of fig. 6.1b is also a single storm, while those of fig. 6.1c are two distinct storms.
//s
O)
(c)
t 1st
storm_m_J
\ 2 nci s t o r m
Fig. 6.1 (a) A sea storm with a single peak. (b) A sea storm with two peaks. (c) Two distinct sea storms (Hs keeps below the threshold hcrit for a span of time greater than 12 hours).
6.1.3 The probability of exceedance P(H~ > h) We shall see later that, thanks to a general property of the sea storms, the design wave can be obtained from P(H~ > h). This is the probability of exceedance of Hs (t), that is the share of time in which the significant wave height keeps above any fixed threshold h at the location under examination. Referring to fig. 6.2, we have
P(H~ > h)  3
Z/kti(h)'
i
where Ati (h) are the time intervals in which H~ exceeds h at the fixed location, and 3 is the total time. Hence, for estimating P(Hs > h) it is not necessary to analyse each single storm. It simply suffices to count how many times the significant wave height has exceeded the fixed threshold h, and to divide this number by the total number of measurements. 6.1.4 The probability density function p (Hs  h) Besides P(Hs > h) we shall use p (Hs  h)dh that is the probability that H~ falls within a fixed small interval (h, h + dh). It is equal to the share of time in which
185
Hs
T h 1
Aq
At2
Ah
At4
Fig. 6.2 P(H, > h) is the quotient between summation (At1 +/kt2 ~ ...) and total time. Clearly it can strongly change from a location to another.
H~ (t) falls within (h, h + dh), or in other words, it is equal to the quotient b e t w e e n time in which h < H~ < h + dh and total time. Referring to fig. 6.3, we have p (/4,  h ) d h  ./7 Z
i
where dti (h; dh) is the ith time interval in which h </4, < h + dh. The functions P(H, > h) and p (/4, = h) are related to each other by
P (H, > h) 
oo
p(/4,
= h)=
dP(H, > h)
dh
(6.1)
j_dh
T h 1
Fig. 6.3 p (H, = h)dh is the quotient between summation (dtl + dt2 + ...) and total time.
186
Chapter 6
P (Hs
expk
\w/J
This is a Weibull distribution whose parameters u and w depend on the special location under examination and are obtained as described here below. Let us imagine we have 20000 Hs data uniformly distributed over the seasons of the year, and let us imagine 2000 of these 20000 Hs data exceed 2.5 m. Then we shall have 2000 P(Hs > 2.5 m)  20000 = 0 . 1 0 . Similarly, we shall obtain P(Hs > 3 m), P(Hs > 3.5 m), and so on. For plotting the data it is convenient to resort to two ancillary variables. We shall
use
X  100 In (2.5h)
with h in metres,
1 Y = 100 In I n   . P
(6.3)
With this choice one works typically on X ranging from 100 to 350 and Y ranging from 50 to 250. If the probability is actually given by (6.2), the data points should be on a straight line
Y = a + bX,
(6.4)
apart from some natural scatter that can be described in terms of confidence intervals [see sect. 6.2.4]. After having obtained the constants a and b of the Cartesian equation for this line, we obtain the two parameters u and w of P(Hs > h), by means of ub, (6.5a) (6.5b)
w
1 exp( 2.5
The verification of these relations is left as an exercise. To this end (i) replace in (6.4) X and Y with their expressions (6.3), so obtaining a relation between l n l n ( 1 / P ) and ln(h), with a and b; (ii) from (6.2) obtain a new relation between l n l n ( 1 / P ) and ln(h), with u and w; (iii) compare these two relations between l n l n ( 1 / P ) and ln(h).
187
Note, the wave recorders having to work continuously for long periods are subject to interruptions due to various causes. If there is no correlation between these interruptions and the wave height there is no consequence on the estimate of P(H, > h). Indeed P(Hs > h) is equal to the quotient between the number of records where Hs exceeds the fixed threshold h and the total number of records. This, whether or not the times between successive records are constant, provided these times are stochastically independent of the significant wave height. 6.2.2 A physical interpretation of the parameters u and w of P(Hs > h) Let us consider the inverse function
(lnl)
which gives the threshold h having a probability P to be exceeded by the significant wave height. E q u a t i o n (6.6) shows that the significant wave height is proportional to w. This implies that, if w of a location A is twice the w of a location B and both these locations have the same u, the wave heights at A will be twice greater than at B. For example, the threshold of significant wave height that is exceeded for one hour, on average, in 100 years at A will be twice greater than at B; or the m a x i m u m expected wave height in 100 years at A will be twice greater than at B (really this last statement also requires that the duration of the storms is equal at the two locations, as we shall see in chap. 7). As to the p a r a m e t e r u, it determines the rate of growth of the significant wave height as P decreases. To realize this item, let us consider two probability levels, say, P  1:1000 and P = 1:10. F r o m (6.6) we have
_ (_ln 1000)+ln 10
from which it appears that the quotient between the significant wave height of probability 1:1000 and the significant wave height of probability 1:10 is larger the smaller u is. In the Oceans both w and u are usually greater than in the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea. The fact that w of the Oceans is greater than w of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea implies that the significant wave height in the Oceans is greater than in the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea. The fact that u of the Oceans is greater than u of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea implies that the difference between Oceans and M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea, as to wave height, gets smaller at low levels of the probability of exceedance. This p h e n o m e n o n appears from fig. 6.4 showing a P(H, > h) of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea and a P(H, > h) of the North Sea. [The graph of the two probabilities is given in coordinates (X,Y) defined by (6.3).] L o o k at the ratio between the significant
188
Chapter 6
250
20O
150
100
/~o~
/~.o*
50
o
50
100
150
200
250
300
Fig. 6.4 A P (/4, > h) of the Mediterranean Sea and one of the North Sea. [Table 4 of Krogstad (1985) was the data source for Halten.]
wave heights of the two locations at a fixed level of the probability P (that is of the ordinate Y). As P gets smaller also this ratio gets smaller. (Bear in mind that the aforesaid ratio would be constant were the two lines parallel.) Note also that the h (P) of the North Sea is substantially greater than the h (P) of the Mediterranean Sea up to the lowest P of any practical interest. 6.2.3 The expression and the main property of the probability density function p (Hs = h) The probability density function p(H~ = h), which is related to P(Hs > h) by (6.1), takes on the form
exp[
u2
The derivative
w 2 Qh)2u2] exp [_ ( h ) , ]
has one zero on the domain h > 0 only if u > 1. The value of h where the derivative is zero is hm  w ( l  _ 1 ) ~  , so that it is smaller than w, and consequently it is also smaller than hcrit (the threshold of the sea storms).
189
T h e c o n s e q u e n c e being that dp (H,  h) dh which will be used in sect. 7.1. 6.2.4 < 0 for h > hcrit,
Fig. 6.5 shows the P(H, > h) of M a z a r a del Vallo in the Straits of Sicily. Data: 14650 values of H, t a k e n with a sampling rate of 1/3 p e r h o u r from July 1989 to D e c e m b e r 1994. W e see the fitting line pass at points X  160, Y  84.5 and X = 260, Y  212, and hence its Cartesian e q u a t i o n is Y =  1 1 9 . 5 + 1.275X. T h e r e f o r e , from the equations (6.5ab) of u and w, we have u = 1.275, that is e (/4, > h)

exp 
1.021
F o r m a n y localities the data points exhibit a m a r k e d linear trend (on the plane X, Y) starting from some Y b e t w e e n 0 and 100, as we see in fig. 6.5. In the case u n d e r examination, having a b o u t 15000 data we attain the probability level of
25O
(X=~l,y=200) ~
911%confidence
interv~
200
150
100
5O
~
0
\ (X= 160,Y=84.5)
5'0
1()0
liO
200
250
300 
Fig. 6.5 Example of sects. 6.2.4 and 6.3.4: how to obtain P (H, > h) from the data of a waverider.
190
Chapter 6
P = 1 : 15000 which c o r r e s p o n d s to Y = 225. Really, the e x t r e m e d a t a h a v e s o m e w i d e c o n f i d e n c e intervals (as we shall see shortly) so that, in this case, o u r k n o w l e d g e is effective r o u g h l y up to Y ~ 200. In conclusion, a straight line fits the d a t a points r a t h e r well in the r a n g e f r o m Y = 50 to Y = 200. C l e a r l y this line is t h e n e x t r a p o l a t e d . H o w m u c h ? Well, the e x t r e m e Y of practical i n t e r e s t lies b e t w e e n Y = 250 a n d Y = 300. H e r e it s h o u l d be n o t e d t h a t t h e m a x i m u m r e t u r n p e r i o d for design p u r p o s e s is 2000 years, a n d the t h r e s h o l d of significant w a v e h e i g h t t h a t is e x c e e d e d for o n e h o u r , on a v e r a g e , e v e r y 2000 y e a r s has a p r o b a b i l i t y p _ 1 200036524 = 5 . 7 . 1 0 8
w h i c h is e q u i v a l e n t to Y = 280. As to the scatter of the data, it is worth making a few remarks. Indeed this subject is partly beyond the classic treatment of the confidence intervals. With the classic treatment we assume that our 14650 data are stochastically independent of one another. This implies the probability that all 14650 data are smaller than a fixed threshold h to be equal to [1  P(Hs > h)] 14650 We call h005 the h making this probability equal to 0.05. Hence, we have [1
5.47m.
Similarly, we can evaluate h0.95 (the probability that all 14650 data are smaller than h095 being equal to 0.95), with the result h0.95 = 7.43m. Conclusion: if P(H, > h) is given by (6.8), then the maximum of a set of 14650 outcomes of the random variable Hs is smaller than 5.47 m five times in one hundred, and is smaller than 7.43 m ninety five times in one hundred. If the maximum is 5.47 m, the extreme datum point is X=262, Y=226. If the maximum is 7.43 m, the extreme datum point becomes X=292, Y=226.
The horizontal segment whose end points are X = 262, Y = 226 and X = 292, Y = 226 is shown in fig. 6.5. It gives the confidence interval within which the extreme datum is expected to be contained with a probability of 90%. Clearly the amplitude of the 90% confidence interval decreases with Y. For example the 90% confidence interval of the second datum, the one of ordinate Y = 218 e:~ P = 2/14650, is 2/3 of the 90% confidence interval of the first datum.
191
What we have described is the classic approach to the problem of the confidence intervals. But, as we have said, the classic approach is not quite satisfactory. The reason is simply that the values of H, sampled at a rate of 1/3 per hour, or even more so at a rate of 1 per hour, are not stochastically independent of one another. To realize this, note that the probability of H, exceeding 5 m at noon, given that/4, is 7 m at 9 a. m., is surely greater than the probability of H, exceeding 5 m at noon given that H, is 0.1 m at 9 a. m. Whereas the stochastic independence involves these two probabilities being equal to each other. The assumption of stochastic independence would be effective were At~amp (the sampling interval) of the order of one day; and it would become perfect a s m tsamp + OO. TO realize what is the consequence of taking a relatively small ,/~ tsamp , it is helpful to consider what would happen if we worked in the limit as /~tsamp + 0o In this case, all 14650 data would be equal to one another because they all would represent the H, at the same time. Therefore, in this case, the probability that all 14650 data are smaller than a fixed threshold h would be equal to the probability that one single datum is smaller than h, which is [ 1  P(H, > h)]. Therefore we should have 1  exp
1.021
1  e x p [ (lh;;51) 127s  0 . 9 5 => h0.95  2.42 m <=>X09s  180. As we can see, the 90% confidence interval should widen and shift leftward: from (Xoo5 = 262,X095 = 292) a s /~/samp + 0(3, t o (X0.05 = 139, X095 = 180) as Atsamp ~ 0. The same trend, even if in a much subdued way will arise in passing from Atsamp + oc to /~/samp = 3 hours. Therefore, in our condition (Atsamp = 3 hours) we expect the confidence interval to be somewhat shifted leftward and to be somewhat wider than the classic confidence interval based on the assumption of stochastic independence.
6.3 The probability of the significant wave height for a given direction of wave advance
6.3.1
L e t us c o n s i d e r the p r o b a b i l i t y P(H, > h; 01 < 0 < 02) t h a t the significant w a v e height at a given location exceeds a fixed t h r e s h o l d h, with the d o m i n a n t d i r e c t i o n being within a fixed sector (0~, 02). H e r e t o o it is c o n v e n i e n t r e s o r t i n g to c o o r d i n a t e s (X,Y) defined by (6.3). T h e g r a p h of P (H, > h; 01 < 0 < 02) in these c o o r d i n a t e s is a line with a positive c u r v a t u r e we shall call sector line. M o r e o v e r we shall call alldirections line, the straight line Y  a + bX which r e p r e s e n t s P(H, > h) regardless of the w a v e direction. T h e sector line necessarily lies on the left of the alldirections line. I n d e e d f r o m the very definitions it follows t h a t
p(Hs > h;
(6.9)
As has b e e n said, the slope of the sector line grows with X, but o v e r the data range, usually, it looks smaller t h a n the slope of the alldirections line (see fig. 6.5).
192
Chapter 6
However, the asymptote of the sector line as X and/or Y + oc cannot take on a slope smaller than the alldirections line's (otherwise the two lines would intersect each other, and the inequality (6.9) would no longer be satisfied). In the light of these remarks it seems reasonable to assume the asymptote of the sector line as X and/or Y , oc to be parallel to the alldirections line. A form that satisfies the assumption on the asymptote and usually fits the data points above a certain threshold (of course, provided 6.2 is effective) is
exp
(6.1o)
This is the difference between two Weibull forms, where the parameters w~ and w~ generally vary from one sector to another, while u takes on the same value as in the probability P(Hs > h). P a r a m e t e r s w~ and w~ must be nonnegative and w~ must be greater than w~, otherwise the probability would take on some negative values. Finally, w~ must be smaller than or equal to w [the p a r a m e t e r of P(Hs > h)], otherwise condition (6.9) would no longer be satisfied. Since w9 < w~, the asymptotic form of (6.10) as h ~ oc is
as h + oc.
(6.11)
The graph of (6.11) in coordinates (X, Y) is a straight line parallel to the alldirections line. This means that the asymptote of the sector line, as X and/or Y ~ ec, is parallel to the alldirections line, as it was required. 6.3.2 How to obtain the parameters w~ and w~ For the aim of evaluating w~ and w~, we do as follows. First looking at the data, we fix two points X~, I11 and X2, Y2 which should belong to the sector line. Since h is a function of X, and P is a function of Y, a single pair hi, P1 corresponds to )(1, Y1 and a single pair h2, P2 corresponds to X2, Y2. Let us assume hi < h2 that implies F r o m (6.10) we have
P1 
(6.12) (6.13)
P~ > P2.
(6.14a)
h2 . y W u w 3
U
u)
(6.14b) (6.15)
W u
W u Ol ~
193
Then, the equations (6.14ab) yield a nonlinear system in the two unknowns 2 and 37. Clearing 37 from this system, we arrive at
(6.16)
Thus 2 (provided that it exists) is that giving the equality of the two following functions: f~ (x) = exp (h~x/w"), x > O, (6.17a)
f2 (X)
P1 Jr [exp (  h 2 x / w u)
 
(6.17b)
where X~upis the value of x for which exp (h2x/w") P2 is equal to zero: X~up =   l n
h2
(6.18)
After having evaluated 2, we obtain w~ using the definition (6.15) of 2: w, w . (6.19)
Then, from w,, we obtain also wf~ by means of (6.14a) or, alternatively, of (6.14b):
wf3h~ In exp    7 /  P 1
(6.20)
6.3.3 The necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of the solution Given that (i) f2 (0) > f~ (0), as a consequence of the inequalities (6.1213), (ii) f~ (x) and fz(x) are strictly decreasing functions, (iii) f2 (x) is defined on [0, Xsup], it follows that 2 exists and is the only solution to (6.16) if
P1 < P~ hl/h2)u"
(6.21)
What does it mean? We have fixed two points X~, Y1 and X2, I72. Generally, there is not an equation of the form (6.10) with the given u, whose graph in coordinates
194
Chapter 6
(X,Y) contains the two fixed points. The existence and uniqueness of such an equation is guaranteed only if the inequality (6.21) is satisfied. For a geometrical interpretation of condition (6.21) let us substitute in it P~, P2, h~ and h2 respectively by I11, Y2, X1 and X2, using the definitions (6.3) relating Y to P and X to h. The result is
X :  X1
Y~Y1 < u.
(6.22)
This shows that the necessary and sufficient condition for the existence and uniqueness of an equation of the form (6.10) (with the fixed u) whose graph in coordinates (X,Y) contains the two points X1, Y1 and X2, Y2 is that the slope of the straight line containing these two points be smaller than u. 6.3.4 Example of a probability estimate Fig. 6.5 shows also the data of
the condition (6.22) is fulfilled. The values of hi, P1 and h2, P2 corresponding, respectively, to X1, Y1 and X2, Y2 are obtained through definitions (6.3) relating X to h and Y to P. The result is hi = 1.315 m, P1 = 1.131.10 2,
h2 = 2.985 m,
(Xsup) of the
The wave climate The functions f~ (x) and f2 (x) [defined by (6.17ab)] take on the forms f~ (x)  exp (  1 . 3 8 1 x ) , f2(x)  1 . 1 3 1 . 1 0 2 + [exp (  3 . 9 2 7 x )  6 . 1 8 . 1 0  4 ]
352 .
195
The abscissa 2 is that for which the difference f2 (x)  f ~ (x) is zero. Fig. 6.6 shows that  1.519, and hence from the equations (6.19), (6.20) we obtain w,~  1.021
(1)
1.519
1 / 1 " 2 7 5
 0.735 m,
) 1/ 1.275
J
 0.710m.
At this stage, w~ and w 9 being known, the sector line can be computed. Let us c o m p u t e an ordinate of this line, for example Y(150). We have X  150 ~ h  1.793 m ~ P  e x p = 5 . 8 0 8 . 1 0 3 ~ Y 163.9.
Similarly, we c o m p u t e the other values of Y(X), and hence we can plot the sector line Y(X).
1 . 5 . 1 0 2
1.0.102
0.5.10.2
196
Chapter 6
As said, the calculations have to be repeated till one finds the sector line Y(X) that best fits the data. In doing so, we should bear in mind that an equation of the form (6.10) generally is able to fit the data only above some lower bound Ymin (typically Ym~n~ 150). Naturally, here too the extreme data points show a scatter that may be due also to some uncertainty in the estimate of the dominant direction.
6.4 Probabilities of the significant wave height for a few areas of the globe
Table 6.1 gives the parameters u and w of the probability P(Hs > h), which we have evaluated for a few locations. The Hs data are those of the N D B C buoys, up to the year 1997. The Hs data for Halten (North Sea) have been taken from table 4 of the paper of Krogstad (1985). The Atlantic is not covered by table (6.1) and will be dealt with separately in Appendix A.2.3, because of some special features. As we noticed in sect. 6.2.4, the data points of P(Hs > h) on the plane XY, at many localities, exhibit a linear trend starting from Y  5 0  100, and the u, w values of table 6.1 represent this linear trend. The graphs of P (Hs > h) on the plane XY for the three locations of the North Sea, the Bering Sea and the NorthEastern Pacific exhibit a linear trend up to the extreme datum point. Whilst, the higher data points (Y > 200) of the two locations of Hawaii and the Gulf of Alaska deviate somewhat rightward (something like in fig. A.2a of Appendix A, even if in a more subdued form). The extreme datum point falls at the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval (Hawaii) and at the upper limit of the 80% confidence interval (Gulf of Alaska). Therefore some caution should be exercised in dealing with these two areas, because they could be affected, to some extent, by the p h e n o m e n o n of the anomalous extreme storms, we shall describe in sect. A.2.3 of Appendix A.
Table 6.1
w[m]
2.083 1.333 1.382 1.555 1.631 1.550
Halten, Norway  North Sea 565'N, 17748'W Bering Sea 5617'N, 14810'W  Gulf of Alaska 4050'N, 13729'W  NorthEastern Pacific 2324'N, 16215'W Hawaii 46035 46001 46006 51001
197
250
200
150
100 y"
//
0 X 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
250
200
150
100
>~~/~ ~
0 50 100 150 200
main
~ ~ " ~
X 250 300
250
200
150
100
5b
1~0
1~0
2~0
300
"
Fig. 6.7 Alghero (West Sardinia)" P (H, > h) regardless of the wave direction, and P (H, > h) for some given directions of wave advance.
198
Chapter 6
Table 6.2 gives the p a r a m e t e r s u, w of P(Hs > h), and w,, w~ of P(H, > h; 0~ < 0 < 02), which we have obtained for a few locations of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea. The data of H, and 0 used for this table are those of the Italian H y d r o g r a p h i c Service, for the period 19891994. F r o m this table we can see which is the sector with the highest waves of each location. It suffices to read the values
Table 6.2
Mediterranean Sea: P(Hs > h) for given directions of wave advance (*)
w [rn]
LOCATION La Spezia (SP) Alghero (AL) Ponza (PO) Mazara del Vallo (MZ) Crotone (CR) Monopoli (MN) Pescara (PE)
S E C T O R  ~
i I I I1
. .307.331 367
.718 .812 .727 .865 .653 ~ : t ~ : :i ~ i'i! . . i l 544 .587 .477 .639 . . .468 . . 1 I: ~ :: 759 .756 .514 .555 Mazara del Vallo .666 .600 .808 .978 1.003 .735 .4401 Ponza Crotone Monopoli Pescara La Spezia Alghero ] : [: ] I ::
' ~i
' t .472 .338 .360 .388 .538 .637 .637 .441 .286 l;:: I::i::ii ............... :::::.592 .512 .645 .512 .590 .549 .429 ; I~:: I;i .404 .486 .605 .611 .487 .378 .375 .378 [...... ..... ii I..........].. .....1 .265 .291
.421 .333 .660 .423 .324,...: i I .............[ i.....::I .. ~ ~i .404 .557 .565 .699 .905 942 534 427
Ponza
Crotone Monopoli Pescara
/~
Mazara del Vallo .655 .591 .795 .895 .907 .710 .431 ]iilil [!!i :i;i! ] ii :i i
iii!~
ii~t~j
1 ;:iiii:!iil
15:~i3 145~ .601 .484 .565 .522 .410[ [!ili 1.384 .374 .561 .552 .470 .365 .340 i;;;
199
of w~," the larger is w~, the higher the waves. I n d e e d we have seen the sector line Y(X) tends to an a s y m p t o t e that moves rightward more, the larger w, gets. As to wg, it has a m i n o r effect: the larger the w~, the slower is the c o n v e r g e n c e of the sector line on its asymptote. This m e a n s that, u n d e r the same w~, the larger the wg, the smaller the waves. F o r example, at C r o t o n e the m a x i m u m w,, belongs to two distinct sectors: sector @ ( 0  2 9 2 . 5 ) and sector @ ( 0  3 1 5 ) . Thus, to decide which of the two sectors has the highest waves, we must resort to WI:~.Since wf3 of sector @ is smaller than w~ of sector @ , the highest waves are those of sector @ . From table 6.2 note that the sea of West Sardinia (Alghero) is by far the strongest near the Italian coasts. This is also confirmed by measurements from satellite (which we shall deal with in sect. 14.3.3).
6.5 The maximum expected wave height in a storm with a given history
T h e probability that all waves of the ith sea state of a storm are smaller than a fixed threshold H is given by (5.55) with N  At/T (hi) (At being the duration of the sea state, h; the significant wave height of the ith sea state and T(hi) its m e a n period). T h e probability that the m a x i m u m wave height of a storm is smaller than a fixed threshold H is equal to the probability that all wave heights of the storm are smaller than H. This in turn is equal to the p r o d u c t of [probability that all wave heights of the first sea state are smaller than H] x [probability that all wave heights of the second sea state are smaller than H] x..., that is to say
~ffO(Hma x < H ) ./ H i=1
[1 
P (H;
H,
At
 h/)] 7(h,)
w h e r e .../ . ......is the total n u m b e r of sea states forming the storm. T h e probability of e x c e e d a n c e of the m a x i m u m wave height in the storm is the c o m p l e m e n t (relative to 1) of :# (//max < H)"
H P (Hma x > H ) 1 i=1
[1  P
At
P(nmax>n ) 
1exp{
i 1 T (hi)
_At
In [1  P (H; H, 
hi)] }.
(6.23)
This formula enables us to evaluate P(Hmax > H) as a function of H for given H,(t) [the time history of the storm]. To this end we have to w o r k on a step function like the one of fig. 6.8, w h e r e each step is a new sea state. T h e result of the calculation
200
Chapter 6
7 ]Hs[ml 6 5
t[hours]
' 8 ' 1; '24 ' 31'4b '4'8' 5'6' 64'72 ' 8'0' 8'8' 9'6 ' 1 ~ ' 1 i 2 Fig. 6.8 Sea storm and its sea states.

does not change if we let At approach zero. This is useful from a mathematical point of view, since it enables us to rewrite (6.23) in the form
o T[h(t)]
_l n 1 ~ [1
 P ( H ; H~  h (t))] d t } ,
(6.24)
where ~ is the duration of the storm. After having obtained P(Hmax > H) (as a function of H), we can compute the maximum expected wave height of the storm. It suffices to recall that the mean value of a nonnegative random variable, like //max, is equal to the integral over (0, ~ ) of its probability of exceedance:
//max

1  e x p
l_   L    ln[1 o T[h(t)]
P(H;Hs
h ( t ) ) ] dt
dH.
(6.25)
The physical interpretation of Hma x is as follows. Let us consider n storms with the same time history. The maximum wave height of the first storm will be Hmaxl, the maximum wave height of the second storm will be Hmax2, and so on. Hmax is the average of Hmaxl, Hmax2, and so on.
201
(ii) the base b of the triangle (that is the duration of the equivalent triangular storm) is such that the maximum expected wave height of the triangular storm is equal to the maximum expected wave height of the actual storm. According to this definition, the height of the triangle is immediately obtained, while the base will be obtained after a few attempts. It is convenient to fix a small base (duration of the triangular storm). Thus we shall find the maximum expected wave height of the triangular storm to be smaller than the maximum expected wave height of the actual storm. Then we shall gradually widen the base till the maximum expected wave height of the triangular storm will be equal to the maximum expected wave height of the actual storm. The computation of Hmax for the triangular storm is done more quickly by means of a specific formula. Indeed we have
I'~/_l~ln[lP(H;Hsh(t))]dtb T[h(t)]
which enables us to rewrite the expressions of P(Hmax > H) and P(Hmax > H ) 1  exp { a b I"  1
o T(h)
l n [ 1  P ( H ; H,  h)] dh} ,
Hmax 
0 1  exp
{ aJa0 T 1 (h) In [1 
P (H; H,  h)] dh } d H .
(6.26b)
6.6.2 The basic property We should expect that P(Hmax > H) of the equivalent triangular storm is generally different from P(Hmax > H) of the actual storm. That is we should expect
'P(Hmx>H)
1.0
0.5
Fig. 6.9 Having required only that the Hmaxof the e.t.s, was equal to the Hmax of the actual storm, the P (Hmax > H) of the e.t.s, and of the actual storm were expected to be generally different from each other, similar to that shown in the figure. Surprisingly enough it was found that the two P(Hmax > H) were practically coincident, which proved to be very useful for applications.
202
Chapter 6
Pfl'/mx> H) 1.0
0.5
X[m,]
; ' ' ' .... ' ' '2'o
_HAm]
....
8 16 24 32 40 48 56 64 72 80 88 96
t[hours]
104 112
Fig. 6.10 A sea storm recorded at La Spezia (Tyrrhenian Sea) and its e.t.s. We see the P (Hmax > H) of the e.t.s. (points) coincides with the P (Hmax > H) of the actual storm (continuous line).
a condition like that of fig. 6.9: the two P (Hma x > H) are different from each other and only their integrals over (0, oc) are equal (since these integrals represent Hmax). On the contrary, the two P(Hmax > H) prove to be nearly coincident. This is a general property, that was found on comparing the two P (Hmax > H), the one of the triangular equivalent storm and the one of the actual storm, for several scores of locations [see an example in fig. 6.10]. In conclusion, the actual storms have some irregular histories generally different from one another. However, an equivalent triangular storm can be associated with each actual storm. The equivalence between this triangular storm and the actual storm is full, since they have the same maximum value of the significant wave height and have the same probability that the maximum wave height exceeds any fixed threshold H. Clearly, dealing with the equivalent triangular storms rather than with the actual storms very much simplifies the mathematical treatment.
T h e w a v e climate
203
6.6.3 The "equivalent sea" We shall call equivalent sea the sequence of the e.t.s. (equivalent triangular storms). Thus the equivalent sea consists of the same number of storms as the actual sea, each of them with the same maximum H,. As a consequence the return period of a storm whose significant wave height exceeds a fixed threshold h is the same in the actual sea and in the equivalent sea. Moreover, we have seen in sect. 6.6.2 the probability that the maximum wave height exceeds a fixed threshold H to be the same in the actual storm as in its e.t.s., which implies that the maximum expected wave height in any given time interval will be the same in the actual sea as in the equivalent sea. Only one topic remains to be considered: what is the relationship between P(H, > h) of the equivalent sea and P(H, > h) of the actual sea? P(H, > h) of the equivalent sea is estimated through a simple quotient:
P(Hs > h)  quotient between time in which H, > h and total time.
For example, to get P(H, > 4 m) it suffices to take the intervals At(4 m) [see fig. 6.11] from the e.t.s, whose Hsmax > 4 m . The probability will then be obtained through the following operation: 1 P (Hs > 4 m)  .yU~ At~ (4 m),
where ,U is the time interval (typically a few years) under examination. Comparisons between the P(H, > h) of the actual sea and the P(H, > h) of the equivalent sea show some minor discrepancies for h > hcrit, and these discrepancies disappear as h(or X) grows. (An example is given in fig. 6.12.) Hence we can assume for the equivalent sea the same P(H, > h) of the actual sea. Conclusion: in the next chapter, which is devoted to the design wave estimate, we shall work on the equivalent sea rather than on the actual sea, and in doing so we shall very much simplify the treatment, and
4m
t
=_
Aq(4m)
Ate(4m)
t 1
Fig. 6.11 Example: the P(Hs > 4m) of the equivalent sea is the quotient between the sum At~ (4 m) + At2(4 m) + ... and total time.
204
Y
250
250
200
2O0
150 Z ~
100
La Spezia
0 100
150
200
250
300
100
150
200
250
300
Fig. 6.12 The actual P(H, > h) (continuous line) and the P(H, > h) ofthe equivalent sea (dashed line): (a) Mazara del Vallo (Straits of Sicily); (b) La Spezia (Tyrrhenian Sea). (i) we shall not introduce any approximation, because the equivalent sea has the same return periods of storms of given characteristics; (ii) we shall have no additional work because, on the range of practical interest, P(Hs > h) estimated for the actual sea is good also for the equivalent sea.
6.7 S t o r m d u r a t i o n s
Being essentially interested in the heavier sea storms, we shall consider the set of the N heavier e.t.s, at a given location in a n u m b e r of years (t/years). In particular we fix N  10 t/years" This means that having a record of, say, five years we shall consider the 50 more severe storms in these five years. We call al0 and bl0 respectively the mean height and the m e a n base of the N e.t.s, belonging to this set. Fig. 6.13 shows the pairs ~ a/alo, b  b/blo, for three locations of the NorthWestern Atlantic. The line represents the function

K 1
D
exp(K2 a)
which best fits the regression b (a). In the dimensional form, it yields
(6.27)
205
AREA
NorthWestern Atlantic
NDB C 44004 3827'N, 7041'W NDB C 44008 4030'N, 6925'W NDB C 46002 4232'N, 13016'W
NorthEastern Pacific
NDB C 46005 4605'N, 13100'W NDB C 46006 4051'N, 13729'W La Spezia 4356'N, 949'E Alghero 4033'N, 86'E Ponza 4052'N, 1257'E
1.80
0.59
Mazara del Vallo 3731'N, 1231'E Crotone 391'N, 1713'E Monopoli 4058'N, 1723'E Pescara 4224'N, 1432'E
2.9 3.3
Table 6.3 gives the values of the parameters of (6.27), which we have obtained for a few areas of the globe. b(a) is decreasing (/(2 negative) because the highest peaks of the r a n d o m process H,(t) are usually sharp and consequently the bases (durations) of their equivalent triangular storms prove to be rather short. The choice of the
206
Chapter 6
... ~i;~:.'. .
.. I
. I I ,L
Fig. 6.13 NorthWestern Atlantic: normalized bases of the equivalent triangular storms versus normalized heights. mathematical form that fits the regression b(a) generally proves to have some very small effects on the calculation of the design wave height, which is dealt with in the next chapter.
Conclusive note
m
The Weibull model for the probability P (H~ > h) is widely cited in literature, and the first systematic use of it was made by Battjes (1970). Some alternative models were used, among the others, by Ochi and Whalen (1980) and Ferreira and Guedes Soares (1999). The formula (6.10) for the P(Hs > h) relevant to a given wave direction is a new proposal. The formula (6.24) for the probability of exceedance of the maximum wave height in a storm is due to Borgman (1970 and 1973). The concept of equivalent triangular storm was introduced by the author in the 80's, and was used to get the solution for return periods of storms with some given characteristics [see references at the end of chap. 7].
References
Battjes J. A., 1970 Long term wave height distribution at seven stations around the British isles. Report A 44 National Oceanographic Institute, Wormley U. K. Borgman L. E., 1970 Maximum wave height probabilities for a random number of random intensity storms. Proc. 12 th Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE, 5364; 1973 Probabilities for highest wave in hurricane. J. Waterways Harbors and Coastal Eng. Div. ASCE 99, WW2, 185207. Cunha C. and Guedes Soares C., 1999 On the choice of data transformation for modelling time series of significant wave height. Ocean Eng. 26, 489506. Ferreira J.A. and Guedes Soares C., 1999 Modelling the longterm distribution of significant wave height with the Beta and Gamma models. Ocean Eng. 26, 713725. Krogstad H.E., 1985 Height and period distribution of extreme waves. Appl. Ocean Res. 7, 158165. Ochi K. and Whalen E., 1980 Prediction of the severest significant wave height. Proc. 17 th Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE, 587599.
207
7.1 The return period of a sea storm where the significant wave height e x c e e d s a fixed threshold 7.1.1 Preliminary solution: the probability density function PA (a) for the
PA (a) da ./t/'(.U) = number of triangles during _~, the height of which belongs to a given interval (a, a + da); da ./J<'(Z) pg(b[a)db = number of triangles during ~3, the height of which belongs to a given interval (a, a + da) and the base of which belongs to a given interval (b, b + db);
PA (a)
(7.1) (7.2)
[PA(a) da ~4.....( 7 ) P8 (bla) db] 8t (h, dh, a, b) = time during 3 , in which 14= belongs to a given interval (h,h + dh), in the triangles the height of (7.3)
which is between a and a + da and the base of which is between b and b + db.
208
Chapter 7
It will have been noted that the 1.h.s. of the first equality, that is PA (a) da ~ 4 / ( ~ ) , multiplied by p , (bla) db becomes the 1.h.s. of the second equality, which in turn multiplied by 6t(h, dh, a, b) becomes the 1.h.s. of the third equality. In practice, the equalities (7.1), (7.2), (7.3) make a sequence. This sequence enables us to gradually trace the steps leading to (7.3), which is the true starting point of our analysis. It implies
A t (h, dh, ~ ) 
I'I"
o o
(7.4)
where At (h, dh, ~ ) denotes the time, during 3 , in which Hs is within a small fixed interval (h, h + dh). As to 6t(h, dh, a, b), its expression derives at once from its definition. It suffices to note that 6t is zero for triangles like @ of fig. 7.1 where a < h; while 6t is equal to (dh/a)b for triangles like @. Therefore
 (dh/a) b if
a>h,
0
if a_<h.
(7.5)
At(h, dh,3)
h o
p A ( a ) j ~ ( Z ) p B ( b l a ) dh b d b d a . a
(7.6)
Note that the lower limit of the first integral passes from 0 in equation (7.4) to h in (7.6), as a consequence of the fact that 6t(h, dh, a, b)  0 for a < h. Clearly, for the linearity property, the terms ~ / U ( 3 ) and dh in (7.6) can be put outside the integral. Then we use the equality
l
H=
O<)
p , (bla) b db  b (a),
o
f[dh
t
I
=I
'"
Fig. 7.1 Time duration of Hs within a fixed small interval (h, h + dh), in an e.t.s, of height a and base b. This duration is equal to (dh/a)b if a > h, while is zero if a < h.
209
where b(a), introduced in sect. 6.7, represents the m e a n base amplitude of the triangles with a given height a. Therefore equation (7.6) is rewritten in the form
A t (h, dh, , ~ )  . / .......(g) dh
oc

(7.7)
(7.8)
which proceeds from the definition of p (/4, = h) [cf. sect. 6.1.4.]. Equation (7.7) gives At in terms of the probability density function PA (a), and equation (7.8) gives the same At in terms of the probability density function p (H, = h). Hence equating the righthand sides of the two equations (7.7) and (7.8) we obtain the relation between the u n k n o w n function PA (a) and the known function
p (IIs =h):
H e r e differentiating with respect to h both sides of the equation, we get .J~....( Y ) PA (h) ff b (h) and hence
pA (a)  _
1 
dp (Hs dh
h)
./~Z,
(7.9)
.~P.J"(3)
_a b (a)
dp (H,  a) . da
(7.10)
(The change of variable, from h in (7.9) to a in (7.10) is simply formal, h and a playing the role of dummy variables.) Equation (7.10) calls for d p ( H ,  h)/dh <_ 0 for the equivalent sea, which can be formally proved to be true from the very definition of equivalent sea. [Fix hi, h2 and dh with h2 > hi. Prove that the duration of time in which H, is between hi and hi + dh is greater than (or equal to) the duration of time in which H, is between h2 and h2 + dh. Hence, the proof follows straightforwardly.] Note that p (H,  h) of the equivalent sea is very close to p (H,  h) of the actual sea only for h > hcrit where dp (H~  h)/dh of the actual sea proves to be always negative (sect. 6.2.3). 7.1.2 S o l u t i o n f o r the r e t u r n p e r i o d R (H~ > h) The n u m b e r of triangles whose height is greater than a fixed threshold h, in the time interval . ~ is
./1/ "( h , . ~Z) ./~t j "(5 7)
oo
PA ( a ) d a .
h
210
Chapter 7
The return period R (Hs > h), that is to say the average time interval between two consecutive triangles with height exceeding h, is related to ~ (h, ~ by
R (Hs > h) g
3)
o o
PA (a) da
h
~ _a dp (Hs  a) da h b (a) da
The convergence of the integral in the last equation is very quick and, on the contrary, b (a) is a very gradually varying function. Hence, we achieve an excellent approximate form assuming b (a) to be constant on the interval of integration, that is assuming b (a)  b (h).
m
b(h) ~ dp(H,a) a h da
da
(7.11)
Finally, with (6.2) of P(Hs > h) and (6.7) of p(Hs  h), we obtain the following simple formula for the return period:
R (Hs > h) b (h) exp ( h ) u . 1 + u (h) u
(7.12)
As an example, fig. 7.2 shows R (Hs > h) for Ponza (centre of the Tyrrhenian Sea). The values of u and w are given in table 6.2, the function b (h) is given by (6.27) and the values of the parameters in this formula are given in table 6.3.
m
211
To check the step leading to (7.11), use the relation (6.1) between p ( H ,  h) and P(H, > h) and the limit lim ap (14,  a) = 0
a+ o c
which is a necessary condition for the mean value of/4, (t) to exist.
7.2 The significant wave height and its persistence vs the return period
7.2.1 The significant w a v e height h (R) The threshold h (R) being exceeded by the significant wave height with a given return period R can be read at once from graphs like the one of fig. 7.2. It suffices to read the abscissa h associated with a given ordinate R. Alternatively, h(R) can be evaluated by means of the formula we deduce here below. We seek the solution to the equation
Failing more precise information, we can very well assume B equation becomes B R exp ( h ) "  1 + u ( h ) " ,
where R and B (besides u and w) are known and h is the unknown. Defining
X m
B exp ( h ) " , R
(7.14a)
(7.14b)
xA+ulnx.
The x satisfying this equality is the limit of the sequence x/A+ulnx/_~ with x0A,
(7.15)
(7.16)
212
Chapter 7
which is easily obtained since the sequence converges very quickly. Then, from x, we get h(R) from the definition (7.14a):
w [in(I )1 +
(7.17)
Naturally, after having obtained h (R) we can evaluate b (h), and hence we take
B  b(h), and carry out a second iteration. Usually, the third iteration is
unnecessary; indeed the difference between h of the second iteration and h of the third iteration is negligible.
Really, equation (7.15) admits two positive solutions, but one can easily prove that the smaller one of these two must be discarded. To this end, prove that the 1.h.s. of (7.15) is smaller than the r.h.s, for x = B/R (given that the storm duration B is smaller than the return period R). This implies that the smallest value of x satisfying (7.15) is smaller than B/R. Then, use (7.14a) to prove that x < B/R would imply (h/w)" < O.
7.2.2 The persistence D (h) After having evaluated h(R) it is necessary to obtain D(h) which is the mean persistence of Hs above the threshold h in the storms where this threshold is exceeded. The expression of D(h) proceeds by dividing
P(Hs > h ) 3  time duration in which Hs > h, in the long interval ~7,
by
3 / R (Hs > h)  number of storms in which H, goes over the threshold h, during ~ .
1000
R[years]
2o
D [hours]
)
15
100
I0
10
10I
0
. 5
/T,[m]
10
Fig. 7.2
Ponza (Tyrrhenian Sea): return period R (Hs > h) and persistence D(h).
m
Design waves and risk analysis The result is D (h)  P (H, > h) R (H, > h), which takes on the form D(h) b(h)

213
(7.18)
(7.19)
if P ( H , > h) is given by (6.2). As an example the persistence D (h) at Ponza is shown in fig. 7.2.
RT,.
The product p (T~  T) dT will represent the probability that a T~ is between T and T + d T (T being arbitrarily fixed). P(Ti > T) will be the probability of exceedance, that is the probability that a Ti exceeds a fixed threshold T. F r o m these definitions it follows that p (Ti  r)   dP(Ti > r) , dT that is P (T~ > r) (7.20) (7.21)
.R=~.
t
rl r2
I
214
Chapter 7
Finally, the symbol ~ ( L , R ) will denote the probability that the event with the given return period R occurs at least once in the lifetime of a structure: encounter probability. 7.3.2 T h e P o i s s o n p r o c e s s In general the occurrences of the given event are assumed to form a h o m o g e n e o u s Poisson process. This is a wellknown process, but for the convenience of the reader we would propose all the same a simple introduction. Let us consider a very large time interval ~ and subdivide it into a sequence of very small intervals dt, as in fig. 7.4. Let us get ~ / d t white balls, and blacken g / R of these balls. Then let us put all the balls in a box, shuffle the balls and draw them at random. Each draw is coupled with a new small interval dt: the first draw with the first small interval, the second draw with the second small interval and so on. If the drawn ball is black we mark a point in the small interval, otherwise we do not. At the end, we shall have m a r k e d g / R points, as many points as black balls, and consequently the m e a n value of the interarrival times T/will be
=R,
according to the definition of sect. 7.3.1. P (Ti > r) is equal to the probability that, given a small interval with a point, the N = r / d t following small intervals do not contain points. Bearing in mind the procedure followed for marking the points, the probability that a given small interval does not contain a point is equal to the quotient between the n u m b e r of white balls and the total n u m b e r of balls, that is
= 1
dt R '
and P ( T / > r) is equal to the Nth power of this probability with N  r/dt"

dt
Multiplying and dividing the exponent r / d t by R, and applying the wellknown limit lim(1  x)~  e 1 ,
x~0
dt
t
Fig. 7.4 How to generate a Poisson process: subdivide the time axis into a very large number of small intervals dt, and draw at random from a box containing white balls and black balls (one draw for each small interval). If the drawn ball is black, mark a point in the small interval.
215
Finally, using the relation (7.20) between the probability density function p (T~ = r) and the probability of exceedance P (T~ > r), we obtain
p ( Ti  r)  l exp (  R )
As to the probability interval L, it is given by
~(L,R)
1  ?7(L, R)  ( 1  R)'"
(7.22)
Here the 1.h.s. represents the probability that the given time interval L does not contain any point, and the r.h.s, represents the Nth power of the probability that a fixed small interval dt does not contain a point, where N is the number of small intervals dt in L. Multiplying and dividing the exponent L/dt by R, and using the same limit as before, we obtain ~(L,R)1  exp (  L ) .
This would be the situation if the process, as it is usually assumed, were the Poisson process. Really, it is likely that the occurrences of environmental events are not so random as in the Poisson process. In particular sometimes it is pointed out that the occurrences of such events show a tendency to cluster as well as to be recurrent. For this reason, in the next section, we shall consider the relation between ~ , L and R under general assumptions on the random point process. Indeed we shall allow the process an arbitrary p(T~ = r). 7.3.3
Let us assume that the random point process of the occurrences of an environmental event is generally different from the Poisson process, and let us imagine we know the probability density function p (Ti = r) of the interarrival times T,.. Consequently we also know the return period of the event, which is equal to the mean value of the Ti, and naturally we know the probability of exceedance P (T~ > T) that is related to p(T~ = T) by (7.21). Without any more information, we seek the probability ~ (L, R) that the given event occurs at least once in a fixed time interval L (the lifetime of a structure). Let us use a thick mark for the part of the time axis consisting of all the T~ < L and of a segment of length L for each Ti > L, as we have done in fig. 7.5. Then,
216
Chapter 7
without looking at the time axis (imagine fig. 7.5 is covered by a black sheet) let us put a stick of length L over the time axis. ~ ( L , R ) is the probability that, after removing the black sheet, we find the stick covers at least one of the points. Thus ~ ( L , R ) is equal to the probability that I [the left end of the stick] falls in the thick m a r k e d part of the time axis. Indeed if I falls in this part, then the interval L contains at least one point; and, conversely, if the interval L contains at least one point, then I must have fallen in the thick m a r k e d part of the time axis. This is instantly obvious on looking at the figure. The probability that I falls in the thick m a r k e d part of the time axis is equal to the quotient between the length C ( 3 ) of this part and the total length of the time axis:
~(L,R)
where
 C(3)/~,
(7.23)
C ( 3 )  thick m a r k e d part of the time axis (here C is for crassum, the latin translation of thick). Let us obtain the expression of C ( J ) in terms of the probability density function p ( T /  T). We have
p(Ti
p ( T ~  T)dT~4/'(~,~)  n u m b e r of T~ > L, in 3 ,
L
....
Tp(Ti  7) d T ~ ( ~ )
(7.24b)
L
t
,r4,
r=
Fig. 7.5 The thick marked part of the time axis consists of all the interarrival times T~ < L and of a span of time L for each interarrival time T~ > L.
217
The length C ( 7 ) of the thick marked part of the time axis is equal to the sum of all the T~ < L (given by 7.24b) plus L multiplied by the number of T~ > L (this number being given by 7.24a). Therefore C ( ~ ) is given by
C(.J~) 
IzxD L
~..
r p ( T ,  r ) d r . / t j (.~) + L
p(T~  r ) d r i P ' ( 7 ) ,
~0
r p ( T~  r ) d r + L
L
p (T~  r ) d r
(7.25)
which yields
lJ L
(7.26)
Check the step from (7.25) to (7.26). To this end, use (7.2021), evaluate by parts the first integral on the r.h.s, of (7.25), and note that
R = T~ ,~7/./;F" (.7). /
7.3.4 A c o r o l l a r y o f the g e n e r a l s o l u t i o n The mean value of the interarrival times T~ is equal to the integral over (0, c~) of the probability of exceedance:
Rr,
< 1,
as it must be, . S ( L , R ) being a probability. Moreover, from equation (7.26) we conclude also that
218
Chapter 7
~(L,R)
{
T
(7.27)
Q Delta function: p(Ti  ~)  5 (~  R), see fig. 7.6. We have P ( T / > r) 6 (r'  R ) d r '  U (r; R),
where U(T; R) is the step function:
U(T;R)
1 0
 ~ o U ( r ; R ) d r
1I,
R 1
ifL<R, ifL>R.
(7.28)
T<_2R,
r > 2R,
(~)
~(L,R)
1
p(Ti=v) P(ri> v)
Fig. 7.6
Q: p ( T /  r )
 delta function.
219
p ( Ti = "r)
1 2R
0
Fig. 7.7
2R
2R
@: p(T, = T)  boxcar.
1exp[@]/~\ R \ K/
P (Ti >
and h e n c e
7)  
@ ~(L,R)
7.3.6
I I Lo exp ( R  ) R
dT1exp
(L  )
W e m u s t m a k e two r e m a r k s . First: we see ~ (L, R) attains its m a x i m u m for given L and R, if p(Ti = T) is the delta function ( c o m p a r e f o r m u l a 7.28 for 5~ (L, R) with inequality 7.27). In o t h e r words, u n d e r the same L and R, ~(L,R) is m a x i m u m if the interarrival times T~ are all equal to one a n o t h e r , i.e. they are all equal to the r e t u r n p e r i o d R. S e c o n d r e m a r k : if p(T~ = T) is an e x p o n e n t i a l function, :~(L,R) takes on the same f o r m we o b t a i n e d in sect. 7.3.2 for the Poisson process. In m o r e detail, in sect. 7.3.2 we p r o v e d that p (Ti = T) of the Poisson process is an e x p o n e n t i a l function, and that ~(L,R) of this process takes on the f o r m 1  exp(L/R). H e r e we have s h o w n that :~ (L, R) takes on the f o r m 1  exp (L/R) if p (Ti = 7) is an e x p o n e n t i a l
P( Ti = ~)
P(Ti>v)
%"
%
R
Fig. 7.8
2R
3R~ 0
SR~
220
Chapter 7
function. This is a step forward: indeed the fact that p (L = 7) of the Poisson process is an exponential function does not imply that a process whose p(Ti = 7) is an exponential function is a Poisson process. To better express this concept, in what follows we suggest the example of a process that in spite of being different from the Poisson process has p(T~ = 7) given by the exponential function. Let us imagine that the values of a lot of interarrival times have been written on paper sheets (one value per paper sheet). These values are distributed according to the exponential function so that, for any fixed T, we have a number exp (  T / R ) J F " of values exceeding 7 ( ~ " being the total number of paper sheets). Let us put the paper sheets in a box, and let us draw: V~ will be the first value drawn, V2 the second value drawn, and so on. Let us use the sequence V~, 1/2, ..., V~ to form a process, in the following manner. We take T1 = T 2 = 7'3 = V1 where 7'1 is the time between the first and the second occurrence times, T2 is the time between the second and the third occurrence times, and 7"3 is the time between the third and the fourth occurrence times. Similarly, we take T4 = 7'5  T6 = V2, and so on. In doing so, we get a point process where the distribution of the interarrival times Ti is exponential, and indeed the share of the Ti greater than any fixed 7 is exp (  r / R ) . However, it is apparent that this is not at all the Poisson process described in sect. 7.3.2. It is a process that exhibits both recurrence and clustering: recurrence because each time we have four occurrences of the event at regular intervals; clustering because whenever a small Vi is drawn, we have four occurrences in a short time. Nevertheless, ~ ( L , R ) is the same as that of the Poisson process where the Ti are stochastically independent of one another. Thus we realize that the three expressions Q , Q and 0) of ~ ( L , R ) , not only refer to three distributions of the interarrival times Ti very different from one another, but they also cover a variety of ways the process actually is: with or without recurrence, with or without clustering. 7.3.7 The design calculation: obtaining R for given ~ and L The design rules usually give the lifetime L and the encounter probability ~ . The engineer has first to compute R from these given L and 5~, and then he has to single out the environmental event with this return period. The structure must be able to withstand such an event with a given safety factor. Using the three different forms Q , Q and Q of 5~ (L, R), the relation which gives R from L and ~ proves to be
0 R=L/~,
2~
(1 + v / 1  ~ ) ,
@RL/ln
(1)
1~
"
221
[Really the equation @ of :~(L,R) has two solutions, but one of the two is discarded because it does not comply with the condition: R , oc as ~ +0 for a fixed L.] In the following sect. 7.4 we shall use these three forms of R ( L , ~ ) to compute the design wave. T h e n we shall c o m p a r e the results obtained, and thus be able to judge w h e t h e r or not our ignorance on the distribution of the interarrival times T~ has some significant consequence on the structure design.
Worked example
L = 50 years, :~ = 0.1
Let us assume which, as we shall see in sect. 7.5, are realistic inputs for the design of ocean structures. Using formula @ for R (L,:~) obtained in the foregoing section, we have @R50/lnQ1_0.11 )475years.
Thus, let us evaluate h (R = 475 years) for Ponza that is characterized by u1.200, w=0.874m, a~o=3.4m, blo=69hours, K1 =1.12, /2=0.115.
Following the p r o c e d u r e given in sect. 7.2.1, let us fix a value of B for the first iteration: B = bl0 = 69 hours. Since R = 475 years, from (7.14b) we have Al+l.2001n( 475"36569 . 2 4 ) = 14.21,
and hence the terms of the sequence (7.16) are x0x~ x2 x3 = x4 = 14.21, 14.21 + 14.21 + 14.21 + 14.21 + 1.200 1.200 1.200 1.200 In In In In 14.21 17.39 17.64 17.65 = 17.39, 17.64, 17.65, 17.65.
Chapter 7
17.
1.200
 7.82 m.
The value of B for the second iteration proceeds from (6.27) of b(h)" ( 7 ; 8 2 ) B  b (7.82 m)  1.12.69 exp 0.115 and, with this new value of B, we obtain A = 14.40,
2 nd
 59 hours,
iteration
The third iteration with B  b (7.90 m) leaves the result unchanged. Therefore, 7.90 m is the threshold of significant wave height associated with the return period of 475 years. Now let us repeat the procedure from the start, using formula @ for R ( L , ~ ) . The result is @R50 ( l + v / 1  0 . 1 )  4 8 7 y e a r s , 2.0.1 h(487 years)  7.91 m. Finally, with formula @ for R (L,2;~) we get @ R  50/0.1  500years, h (500 years)  7.93 m. The summary is @ @ @ R500years R487years R475years => =~ =~ h(R)7.93m, h(R)7.91m, h(R)7.90m.
7.4.2 Comment on the results of the worked example We have to come back to the conclusion of sect. 7.3. We know practically nothing about the form of the distribution of the interarrival times T~. This is why we have assumed three distributions very different from one another, from which we have got three alternative formulae for R (L,5~). Using these formulae in the worked example, we have found three different values of R. The differences are within 5% (largest difference: R = 500 years with formula @ against R = 475 years
223
with formula @). As to h (R), that is the true target, the differences are within only 0.4%. In reality, the design input (L = 50years, ~  0.1) which we have taken is a rather severe one. For some smaller lifetimes and/or higher encounter probabilities, the differences resulting from the use of the different forms of R ( L , ~ ) prove to be somewhat larger. To get an idea of this, let us consider the case of L = 15years, 3 = 0.5. These are the smallest lifetime and the highest encounter probability granted by design rules for some special classes of structures. Using the formulae @, @ and @ with these values of L and ~ we get @ R=30.0years @R25.6years @ R=21.6years =~ h ( R ) = 6 . 4 5 m , =~ h ( R ) = 6 . 3 6 m , ~ h(R)=6.27m,
where h(R) is here too for Ponza. As we can see even in this extreme case, the differences between the values of h (R) do not exceed 3%. In the light of these results, it is apparent that we can use any of the alternative formulae @, @, or @ with practically negligible differences on the structure design. In what follows we shall use formula @, that is ~(L,R)1  exp (  R ) , (7.29a) (7.29b)
R (L'~)  L/ ln (
1~ )
The reason for this choice is simply that @ is valid for the Poisson process, so this formula is usually known. The more we know after the foregoing analysis is that, even in the most probable event that the random point process of the storm occurrences differ greatly from the Poisson process, the use of expression @ will lead to only negligible errors on the design wave.
224
Chapter 7
the minimum L and the maximum 3 prescribed by a few European guidelines on the d e s i g n o f t h e v a r i o u s classes o f m a r i t i m e s t r u c t u r e s (cf. P u e r t o s d e l E s t a d o , 1990). A n a d d i t i o n a l v e r i f i c a t i o n is r e q u i r e d f o r t h e r u b b l e m o u n d b r e a k w a t e r s . S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e s t r u c t u r e m u s t b e a b l e to w i t h s t a n d , w i t h p r a c t i c a l l y n o d a m a g e , a sea state that has a relatively high encounter probability. This relatively high p r o b a b i l i t y is s p e c i f i e d in t a b l e 7.3. T a b l e 7.1 M i n i m u m lifetime L (years) Safety level (1)
___+
T a b l e 7.2
M a x i m u m encounter probability
risk for human life (3) small 0.20 0.15 0.10 high 0.15 0.10 0.05
T a b l e 7.3
I1~Level 1: structure of local interest; small risk of loss of human lives or environmental damage in case of failure. Level 2: structure of general interest; moderate risk of loss of human lives or environmental damage in case of failure. Level 3: structure of protection against floods, or structure of international interest; high risk of loss of human lives or environmental damage in case of failure. For more details, see the Italian or Spanish guidelines on the design of maritime structures. I2~The judgement is based on quotient Q between cost of losses and investment:
225
F o r the design of a few s t r u c t u r e c o m p o n e n t s (e.g. the a r m o u r of a r u b b l e m o u n d ) , besides the significant wave height, we have to specify also the d u r a t i o n of the design sea state. To this end, we r e a s o n as follows, h(R) is the t h r e s h o l d that is e x c e e d e d , on a v e r a g e , once in R years; and the p e r s i s t e n c e of H, a b o v e this t h r e s h o l d is a r a n d o m v a r i a b l e w h o s e m e a n value D(h) is given by (7.19). This m e a n s that H, remains on the threshold H on a v e r a g e for a span of time of 2D (h). W e m e a n that h is the m e a n value of H, for this span of time. T h e r e f o r e we assume
2 D(h)
Fig. 7.9 is helpful to realize this. N o w we can c o m p l e t e the calculation for L  50 years, ~  0.1 at Ponza. In sect. 7.4 we saw that R  475 years, h (475 years)  7.90 m, b (7.90 m)  59 hours, from which, using (7.19), we obtain D(7.90 m) 59  3.3 h o u r s ,
1+1.200(78904)1"200
 2 . 3 . 3  6.6 h o u r s .
and hence
H~
Fig. 7.9 T h e design sea state is applied for coastal structures. T h e significant wave height of this sea state is equal to the threshold h being e x c e e d e d with a prescribed r e t u r n period. T h e duration should be taken of 2 D ( h ) (twice the average persistence above the threshold h).
226
Chapter 7
7.6 The return period of a wave with a height exceeding a fixed threshold
7.6.1 S o l u t i o n f o r the return p e r i o d R* ( H ) With this section we start a new reasoning that will lead us, in sect. 7.8, to the design waves for the offshore structures. Here too we resort to a sequence of equalities, where the 1.h.s. of the i + i th equality is equal to the 1.h.s. of the ith equality multiplied by a new term. Referring to a very large time interval 3 , we have p (H, = h) dh 3 = time in which h < H, < h + dh, during ~ ;
number of waves in the sea states with h < Hs < h + dh, during 3 ;
1 p(Hsh) T(h)
h)dh 3=
threshold H, in the sea states with h < H= < h + dh, during ~ . Integrating the 1.h.s. of this last equality over 0 < h < oc we obtain ~ number of waves with a height greater than H in 3 : ( H , 3 ) , the
./,t~ ....( H , 3 )
(x)
P(H; Hs  h)
1 p (Hs = h) d h 3 . T(h)
The return period R* (H) of a wave with a height exceeding the fixed threshold H is equal to the quotient between ,~" and the number of waves higher than H in that is R* (H) = 3 / . / U (H, ._~), and hence R* (H) 
EIo
]1 .
(7.30)
As to the functions appearing in this equation, we can use (5.26), (5.48a) and (6.7). The integrand in (7.30) has a maximum. Indeed it approaches zero as h, 0 because of P (H; Hs = h), and approaches zero as h , oc because of p (Hs = h). The integral can be evaluated numerically even with a relatively large integration step: usually a step of 0.5 m is suitable. Moreover the interval of integration can be reduced to (0.3H, 2.0H) without any appreciable consequence. 7.6.2 A s e e m i n g p a r a d o x Fig. 7.10 shows a typical R* (H) for the Mediterranean Sea (Ponza: w = 0.874 m, u = 1.200), and we suspect it stirs up some doubts. Specifically, the fact that the
227
~* [years]
(n)
100
10
H[m]
return period of a wave height exceeding 8.4 m is only 1/10 of a year will probably not be easy to accept. We are afraid that the reader's doubts would change to a refusal if we were to go down to some lower return period. It suffices to say that R* (5 m)  9 hours! Really this result seems to go against common sense, and it suggests something is wrong in the equation (7.30), or in the calculation, or in both. But it is not so. As to the equation, it is based on only a few simple steps, check them little by little and you will realize the solution is exact whatever the H. As to the calculation, anybody can quickly implement a PC program. Anyway, we can do a general verification together. Let us estimate how many waves higher than 5 m occur on average in one year, during sea states with an H, between 3.75 m and 4.25 m. The quotient between time in which H, is within the range (3.75 m, 4.25 m) and total time is P ( H , > 3.75 m )  P ( H , > 4.25 m )  1.94.10 3 and hence H, will be between 3.75 m and 4.25 m, on average for 3 6 5 . 2 4 . 1 . 9 4 . 1 0 .3  1 7 . 0 h o u r s / y e a r . The mean wave period in a sea state with an H, of 4.0 m (4.0 m is the median of the range 3.75 m, 4.25 m) is evaluated by means of (5.26), and proves to be T6.67r 4 . 9 . 8 = 6.6 s. exp [(38774. )~ 2 ]  ex p [_(4.250.874 )1.200_
228
Chapter 7
Therefore, we expect the 17 hours per year in which/4, is between 3.75 m and 4.25 m to contain 17. 3600 = 9270 waves. 6.6 The probability of a wave higher than 5 m in a sea state with an /4, of 4 m is calculated by means of (5.48a), and proves to be P(5 m; H s  4 m ) exp I  2.31 ( 4 ) 2 ]  0.027,
so that the n u m b e r of waves higher than 5 m, which we can expect to occur in the 17 hours in w h i c h / 4 , is between 3.75 m and 4.25 m, is 9270.0.027  250. The conclusion is that R* (5 m) < 3 6 5 . 2 4 = 35 hours, 250 that is the return period of a wave higher than 5 m is smaller than 35 hours. Smaller, clearly because we have counted only the waves in the sea states with Hs b e t w e e n 3.75 rn and 4.25 m. If we also count the other waves higher than 5 m, that is to say the waves in the sea states with H~ < 3.75 m and in the sea states with H~ > 4.25 m, we get the very nine hours of return period we said above. The reason why the return period of a wave higher than 5 m seems so small is simply that the definition of R*(H) does not correspond with our intuitive idea of return period. By return period of a wave higher than 5 m we m e a n the time that on average elapses between two occurrences of some waves higher than 5 m. While R*(5 m) is the m e a n time interval b e t w e e n two occurrences of a single wave higher than 5 m; and it is small because even a few h u n d r e d waves higher than 5 m may occur together in a rather short time during a storm. Thus we realize that a more effective definition is that of "return period of a storm containing at least one wave higher than the fixed threshold H " . We shall call this new return period R(H).
7.7 The return period of a sea storm containing at least one wave higher than a fixed threshold
7.7.1
Alternatively to the definition given at the end of the foregoing section, R(H) can be also defined as "the return period of a storm whose m a x i m u m wave height exceeds the fixed threshold H " . The two definitions are equivalent to each other because, if the m a x i m u m wave height exceeds the fixed threshold H, then the storm contains at least one wave higher than H; and, conversely, if the storm contains at least one wave higher than H then the m a x i m u m wave height exceeds H.
229
To obtain R(H) it is helpful to refer to a new alternative definition. Specifically it is convenient to pass from the return period of a storm.., to the return period of a wave with the two following features (i) to be higher than the fixed threshold H, (ii) to be the highest wave of the storm in which it occurs. Indeed it is apparent that the number of storms whose maximum wave height exceeds the threshold H is equal to the number of waves having both the properties (i) and (ii). Then the return period R(H) will be given by R (H)  ./f...... (H,.U; max) ' where . ~ is the usual very large time interval and
...! "(H,.7;
(7.31)
This number, whatever the H, takes on the same value in the actual sea and in the equivalent sea. Indeed, we saw in sect 6.6 that the equivalent triangular storms and the actual storms have the same probability that the maximum wave height (of the storm) exceeds any fixed threshold H. Therefore, we shall refer again to the equivalent sea, where the storms are triangles like in fig. 7.1.
7.7.2 Solution f o r the return period R ( H ) To obtain . t "(H, T; max), we start as usual from a sequence of equalities. The first three equalities are (7.123) that here we omit to rewrite, hence the sequence goes on as follows
r(h)
= number of waves
present in the stages of the storms in which H, is between h and h + dh, only for the storms whose Hsmaxis between a and a + da and whose duration is between b and b + d b , during .'7;
{PA (a) da ....... ! (.U)pB(bla) db] at(h, dh, a,b) T(h) p (x;/4,  h) d x
 number of waves with a height between x and x + dx, in the stages of the storms in which H, is between h and h + dh, only for the storms whose //,max is between a and a + da and whose duration is between b and b + db, during .U;
230
Chapter 7
The term {.} on the 1.h.s. of (7.33) is the probability that all other wave heights of the storm (apart from the height between x and x + dx in the sea state with H, between h and h + dh) are smaller than x. The proof is left as an exercise. [Hint: keep in mind that ~(Hmax < x; a, b) is the probability that all waves of the storm have a height smaller than x, and recall how we got this probability in sect. 6.5.] J~ ( H , ~ ; max) proceeds by integrating the 1.h.s. of (7.33) over
{(x,h,a,b)lx c (H, ec),h c (0, oc),a c (h, oc) and b c (0, oc)}.
Using the formula (7.5) for ~)t(h, dh, a, b), we obtain jC~(H,3;max) &'(3) " {~(Hmax
<
H O h 0
x;a,b)/[1  P(x;H, = h ) ] } d b d a d h d x .
Then, using the formula (7.10) for PA (a) and the equation 9(Hmax < x ; a , b )  e x p { b l a l    ~ l n [ 1  P ( x ; H s o r(h')
h')]dh'},
_p 1 ~ (x;H, o T(h)
 h)[1  P(x;H,
h)] 1.
f ~ _ dp (Hs  a) b(a) da Jh
where
o pB(bla)bexp[K(a'x)b] d b d a d h d x '
K(a'x)a
1 [" ~
o T(h')
In [1  P (x; H ,
 h')] d h ' .
[As for the equation of 2;~(Hmax < x; a, b), we have given it without a comment, since it proceeds immediately from (6.26a).]
231
From the expression of the n u m b e r . / / ......(H, g; max) and equation (7.31) relating this number to R(H), we get
R(H)  { I ~ I ~ _1
p (x; H,  h)
H 0 r(h)
OG
dp (H,  a)
 
da
b(a)
(7.34)
oPB(b a ) b e x p [ K ( a , x ) b ] d b d a d h d x
where the term [1  P(x; H,  h)] ~ has been neglected because it has little effect on the result, as one can easily verify by numerical evaluation of the integrals. To proceed, we should know the form of PB (b]a). However, rather than looking for some formula that fits the data of the equivalent triangular storms it seems more effective to assume two very different forms for PB (b]a), obtain R(H) for each of these two forms, and see how much the two solutions for R(H) differ from each other. If the difference will be a significant one, of course the data analysis of PB (bla) will become necessary, otherwise this analysis will be useless. As two extreme forms of PB (bla) we assume
@ @
pB(bla)  6 [ b  b ( a ) ] ,
1 exp[ b b(a) L b(a)
pB(bla)_
The first one (@) is the delta function: all storms of given H s m a x   a have the same duration b that coincides with the mean value b(a). The second one (@) is the exponential function: the durations of the storms of given Hsmaxa have a very large scatter with respect to their mean value b (a). The integral with respect to b in (7.34) proves to be j~ 0
{  b ( a ) e x p [K(a,x)b(a)]  b(a)[1
with f o r m @ o f pB(bla )
2
K(a,x)b(a)]
'
R(H){I 1Jo~
@ .exp
m
r (hvp (x; H,  h) I
 dp(H"  a) da
(7.35)
  I1 n E /a/la a 0 T (h')
232
Chapter 7
R(H)  { I ' I _1
p (x; H,  h)
r(h)
OQ
_ dp (Hs  a) da 2
E1
dadhdx
/1
where the integrals can be solved numerically with the criteria suggested in the following sect. 7.7.3. Table 7.4 compares a few values of H(R) for Ponza (w = 0.874 m, u = 1.200) obtained with the two alternative formulae for R(H). We see that the differences due to the use of the two different formulae are very small especially in the range of practical interest for the structure design. This comparison has been done with the same outcome also for other locations of the Mediterranean Sea and of the Oceans. The conclusion is that the shape of the distribution of the durations of the storms has only a very small effect on H(R), and thus we can use formula @ or formula @ for R(H) to our liking. We shall use @, that is to say (7.35) because it is slightly more conservative, indeed it gives a somewhat greater wave height for a given return period. Table 7.4 Results obtained from the use of two alternative formulae for R(H) FORMULA(~) FOR R (H) R [years] H[m] 8.43 10 100 1000 10.98 13.39 15.72 10 100 1000 FORMULA(~) FOR R (H) R [years] H[m] 8.26 10.82 13.25 15.61
7.7.3 Hints for the calculation of R (H) The calculation of R (H) by means of (7.35) is much simpler than it may seem. First of all, since the integrand is a regular function, we can use some integration steps greater than we would probably choose: steps Ax, Ah, Aa and A h ' of 0.5 m usually prove to be adequate. Moreover all contributions to the integral, apart from a negligible share, come from a small region of the 4dimensional interval of integration, so that we can replace
lo If...
dh' da dh dx,
233
I2H[O8x[l5hl a H dO.3x dh
... dh' da dh dx.
0.6a
H e r e for simplicity we have t r e a t e d that of formula (7.35) as a 4fold integral. Really it is a 3fold integral with a o n e  d i m e n s i o n a l integral in the a r g u m e n t of the exponential function, but the substance of numerical w o r k is the same. To fix our ideas, let us think of a location of the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea, let us take H  10 m, and let us use integration steps Ax, Ah, A a and A h ' of 0.5 m. Then, the first integral is the sum of the n u m b e r of the highest waves in their respective storms, which have a height x b e t w e e n 10m and 10.5 m, b e t w e e n 10.5 m and 11 m, and so on (recall that the integral multiplied by .Ugives the n u m b e r of waves which are the m a x i m u m of their storms and are higher than H, during 7 ) . W e should go on as far as infinity, but it is intuitive that, in the set of waves higher than 10 m, the a m o u n t of those higher than 20 m will be negligible. This is why the u p p e r limit of the first integral passes from ~ to 2 H with practically no error. Let us pass to the second integral, the one with respect to h, and to fix our ideas, let us take x  18 m. This integral is the sum of the n u m b e r of waves [which are the highest of their storms and have a height of 18 m] which belong to sea states with a significant height b e t w e e n 0 and 0.5 m, b e t w e e n 0.5 m and l m and so on as far as infinity. H e r e too it is a p p a r e n t that the n u m b e r of these waves occurring in the sea states with a significant wave height b e t w e e n 0 and 0.5 m will be absolutely negligible because the probability of a wave height of 18 m in a sea state with H, < 0.5 m is zero as a m a t t e r of fact. M o r e o v e r the n u m b e r of these waves in sea states with a significant wave height b e t w e e n 17.5 m and 18 m is also zero. I n d e e d , such h e a v y sea states have a negligible probability of occurring, and f u r t h e r m o r e the probability that a wave of height 18 m, in a sea state with a given significant wave height of 18 m, is the highest wave of its storm is practically zero. H e n c e we realize that the whole contribution to the second integral will come from an interval whose lower limit is g r e a t e r than zero and whose u p p e r limit is smaller than x. T h e interval (0.3x, 0.8x) proves to be wide enough. As to the third integral, to fix our ideas, let us take x  18 m, h  11 m. This integral is the sum of the n u m b e r of waves [which are the highest of their storms, have a height of 18 m, and belong to a sea state with an H~ of 11 m] which occur in storms whose Hsmaxis b e t w e e n 11 m and 11.5 m, b e t w e e n 11.5 m and 12 m and so on. Thus, fixing an u p p e r limit of integration of 1.5h  16.5 m is as if, being i n f o r m e d that the sea storm includes a sea state of H~  11 m, we said: the probability that Msmaxhas e x c e e d e d 16.5 m is negligible. Of course, this suggestion (changing the u p p e r limit of the third integral from ~ to 1.5h) is the result of a n u m b e r of calculations for different areas. T h e fourth integral remains, the one in the a r g u m e n t of the e x p o n e n t i a l function. This e x p o n e n t i a l function gives the probability 3 (Hmax < x) for a triangular storm of d u r a t i o n b (a) and m a x i m u m significant wave height a. To fix our ideas let us take x  18 m, a  12 m. T h e n the integral (multiplied by b (a)/a) is the sum: [logarithm
234
Chapter 7
of the probability that all waves in the stage of the storm where 0 < Hs < 0.5 m are smaller than 18 m] + [logarithm of the probability that all waves in the stage of the storm where 0.5 m < Hs < 1.0 m are smaller than 18 m] + ... + [logarithm of the probability that all waves in the stage of the storm where 11.5 m < H, < 12 m are smaller than 18 m]. Clearly, the probability that all waves in the stage of the storm with H, between 0 and 0.5 m are smaller than 18 m is practically equal to 1, and consequently the logarithm of this probability is zero. Thus we realize that the lower limit of integration can be taken greater than zero without any appreciable consequence on the result. Experience suggests this lower limit can be raised to 0.6a. Finally, note that the solution for R(H) is exact provided p(H, = h) is the p.d.f, of the significant wave height of the equivalent sea. However, we can very well use the actual p(H, = h), provided H is greater than about 3hc~it (cf. sect. 6.1.2). Here, bear in mind that p(H, = h) of the equivalent sea tends to coincide with the actual p(H~ = h) as h increases (cf. sect. 6.6.3). 7.7.4 Comparison between R (H) and R* (H) The function R* (H) of fig. 7.10 has been plotted again in fig. 7.11 where it is c o m p a r e d to R (H). The third line gives N (H)  average n u m b e r of waves higher than a fixed threshold H, in the storms where at least one wave higher than this threshold does occur. To obtain N (H) it suffices to write the two following equalities"
3 / R * (H)  n u m b e r of waves higher than H, in ~ , Y / R (H)  number of storms containing at least one wave higher than H, in 3 .
1000 R,R*[years]
hlO0
100
O.1
. . . . .
1 ., Lmj~rr~ ,
10
w
15
20
,
Fig. 7.11 Ponza: return periods R (H) and R* (H). N (H)  R (H)/R (H) is the average number of waves exceeding the fixed threshold H in the storms containing at least one of these waves. (Obtained by means of 7.30 and 7.35.)
Design waves and risk analysis I n d e e d N (H) is the q u o t i e n t b e t w e e n these two numbers:
(H) 
235
R* (/4)
R (H)
(7.36)
A t this stage we can definitively u n d e r s t a n d that strange result of sect. 7.6.2. W e have seen that R* (5 m)  9 hours; now we can add that R (5 m)  25 days, and hence U(5m) 25.24 = 66. 9
Conclusion" at Ponza, on average, once in 25 days, a storm occurs with wave heights exceeding 5 m, and each of these storms contains, on average, 66 waves higher than 5 m. This m e a n s that, on average, we have to wait 25 days to see waves higher than 5 m, but the average time interval b e t w e e n two occurrences of a wave higher than 5 m is only 9 hours, because each time waves higher than 5 m occur, there is an average of 66 of these together.
7.8 Offshore structures: the design wave
7.8.1
W e have to verify that offshore structures are able to withstand the r e a s o n a b l y highest wave in their lifetime. Following the design rules, we have to take the wave height that has a given probability :~ of being e x c e e d e d in the lifetime L.
0.5
0.1
i
0 '
'
'
'
:5
'
'
'
10
15
~t~,
, ' 20'
O[m]=
Fig. 7.12 Ponza: probability that the largest wave height in fifty years exceeds any fixed threshold H. (Obtained by means of 7.37.)
236
Chapter 7
The probability that the maximum wave height in the lifetime L exceeds a fixed threshold H is equal to the encounter probability of a storm whose maximum wave height exceeds H:
1  exp
L
i, o
~ _p 1( x ; H s
r(h)
 h)
exp
[
oo
_ d p ( H s  a) . da
(7.37)
b(a)
I a~ l n1[ 1 o T (h')
for Ponza (w = 0.874 m, u = 1.200). The P [Hmax (50 years) > H] is shown in fig. 7.12. We see this probability is equal to 0.1 (the prescribed value) for H = 15 m that, accordingly, is the design wave height, i.e. it is the desired H (L) = maximum wave height in the lifetime of a structure. Physical meaning: there is a 10% probability that the largest wave height in 50 years at Ponza exceeds 15.0 m.
7.8.2 T h e sea state w h e r e the h i g h e s t w a v e in the l i f e t i m e o f a s t r u c t u r e will OCCHF Knowledge of the wave height is not enough for evaluating the wave force. We also need to know the wave period, and hence we must try to foresee the characteristics of the sea state in which the highest wave in the lifetime of the structure will occur. For this goal we reason as follows. If we retrace the steps that led us to the formula (7.35) for R (H), we realize that
.~ T(h) p ( x ; H s  h) J
[~
h
dp (H,  a)
da
[ lalja 1 exp
n
o T (h')
Design waves and risk analysis = n u m b e r of waves which are the highest of their storms, having a height b e t w e e n x and x + dx and b e l o n g i n g to the stages of the storms in which the significant wave height is b e t w e e n h and h + dh, during J , and
7
237
(7.38)
I
a
~ T(h)
p(x;H,h) 1
h 
d p (Hs  a) da "
exp
[ ja
b(a)
o r(h
da dh dx 
n u m b e r of waves which are the highest of their storms, having a height b e t w e e n x and x + dx, during .~7. H e n c e , if we define
(7.39)
p (/4,  h; Hmax  x ) d h  p r o b a b i l i t y that a wave of given height x, which is the highest w a v e of its storm, occurs in a sea state with a significant wave height b e t w e e n h and h + dh, we have p (/4,  h; Hmax  x ) d h that is
p ( H s   h;
Hma x x) m
T (h~p (x; H,  h)
da
exp
m
1
0 T(h) p
(x; H,  h)
[ ja
L e t us c o m e b a c k to our w o r k e d example. W e have a highest wave of 15 m in the lifetime of 50 years. Of course, if this w a v e is the highest in 50 years, it is also the highest of its storm. As a c o n s e q u e n c e , the p r o b a b i l i t y density function of the sea state w h e r e this wave will occur is given by (7.40) with x = 15 m. This p r o b a b i l i t y density function is p l o t t e d in fig. 7.13 and p r o v e s to be n a r r o w with the p e a k at h = 7.2 m. This value will be d e n o t e d by the s y m b o l H, (L): H, (L)  significant wave height of the sea state in which the highest wave in the lifetime of the structure will occur with the highest probability. In the case u n d e r e x a m i n a t i o n , the m a x i m u m wave height of 15 m, with the highest probability, will occur in a sea state with an H, of 7.2 m. T h u s the highest wave in the 50 years lifetime will be not only a very high wave for the given location, b u t also an e x c e p t i o n a l l y high wave for the very sea state w h e r e it will occur.
238
Chapter 7
p(n, =h ;Hm~=lSrn)
I
I I I I I I I
h[m]
I
7.2
10
Fig. 7.13 Ponza: p.d.f, of the H, of the sea state where the maximum wave height in fifty years will occur. (Obtained by means of 7.40 for the maximum wave height of 15 m.)
Very well! Indeed, if the wave is exceptionally high for its own sea state, we can use the quasideterminism theory, and hence we can foresee that it will have a very precise period. Specifically, we saw in sect. 5.7.2 that a very high wave has a period of 0.92 Tp, if the spectrum is the mean J O N S W A P . As to Tp we can use the formula (4.26), or lacking information on Phillips' p a r a m e t e r A, we can use the formula (4.27). Therefore in our case we have
Tp  8.5 7r
and consequently the period of the highest wave, which we will call T (L), is T (L) = 0.92.11.4 = 10.5 s. The conclusion is: Ponza: w = 0.874m, u = 1.200
:=~
design wave
5~ = 0.1
Let us note, at the end, that the advantages of being able to use the quasideterminism theory are not confined to the wave period estimate. Indeed we shall see in chapter 10 that a wave which is exceptionally high with respect to its own sea state, with a very high probability, is the central one of a well defined threedimensional group at the apex of its development stage. The quasideterminism theory provides the velocity potential of this group, from which one can draw the flow field and hence the wave forces on structures. Naturally, at a first degree of approximation, the flow field and wave forces can be evaluated even by means of the periodic wave theory.
239
Calculation criteria
There are some offshore structures which put up practically the same resistance to waves w h a t e v e r the wave direction. Then, there are a few offshore structures and most coastal structures, which put up a different resistance to differently inclined waves. For this second family of structures we have to calculate h (R; 0~ < 0 < 02) and H(L;O1 < 0 < 02), where the symbols have an a p p a r e n t meaning: only the waves whose direction is within a given sector are considered. In the various areas there is usually a main sector for which the probability of exceedance P(H, > h; 01 < 0 < 02) proves to be nearly equal to P(H, > h), at least for large values of h. That is to say main sector:
(7.41)
It suffices only to read table 6.2 to see that at each location there is a sector whose w~ is very close, sometimes even equal, to w. Recall that P(Hs > h; 0~ < 0 < 02) a p p r o a c h e s the asymptotic form (6.11) as h grows, and this asymptotic form coincides with P(Hs > h) if w~  w. As a consequence of (7.41), we have main sector ~ h (R; 01 < 0 < 02) ,,,v h (R), H (L; 01 < 0 < 02)  H (L),
whereas other sectors ~ h (R; 01 < 0 < 02) < h (R), H (L; 01 < 0 < < H (L).
OUTPUT: h(R;01<O<02)"
X INPUT: h(R)
Fig. 7.14 Enter with the significant wave height of given return period, follow the marked path and obtain the significant wave height for the specific direction of wave advance you are interested in.
240
Chapter 7
A practical w a y to e v a l u a t e the w a v e h e i g h t for a given sector of the w a v e direction is the following. W e first c o m p u t e the w a v e h e i g h t r e g a r d l e s s of the w a v e direction, that is h(R) a n d / o r H(L) a n d Hs(L). T h e n , f r o m h(R) we get h(R;01 < 0 < 02) following the flow of fig. 7.14. Similarly, f r o m Hs(L) we get H~ (L; 01 < 0 < 02). Finally, as to H(L; 01 < 0 < 02) we a s s u m e
H (Z; 01 < 0 < 02) H (Z) = . //s (L; < 0 < //s (L)
(7.42)
In this m a n n e r , the d u r a t i o n of the design sea state for a given s e c t o r of the w a v e d i r e c t i o n p r o v e s to be the s a m e as the d u r a t i o n of the design sea state r e g a r d l e s s of the w a v e direction. T h e p r o o f of this s t a t e m e n t is left as an exercise. [Hint: n o t e t h a t e q u a t i o n (7.18) has a g e n e r a l validity, a n d t a k e a c c o u n t of the flow of fig. 7.14.]
7.9.2
Worked example
F o r P o n z a (w = 0.874 m, u = 1.200), with the design specifications: L  50 years, 3 = 0.1, which imply R = 475 years, we have o b t a i n e d
h(R) = H(L)
= 15.0 m,
H~(L) =
7.20 m,
T(L) =
10.5 s.
H e r e we c o m p l e t e the picture with the w a v e e s t i m a t e for the sectors E A S T : 90  11.25 < 0 < 90 + 11.25 , NORTH:  1 1 . 2 5 < 0 < +11.25 .
( W e m e a n the w a v e s which a d v a n c e e a s t w a r d s and the w a v e s which a d v a n c e n o r t h w a r d s . ) In table 6.2 we r e a d E A S T : w,  0.865 m, NORTH: %  0.639 m , w 9  0.754 m , w 9  0.609 m .
T h e east sector is the m a i n one, i n d e e d it has a w~ of 0.865 m which is v e r y close to the w of 0.874 m of the p r o b a b i l i t y P(Hs > h). As a l r e a d y stated, for the m a i n sector we use the s a m e w a v e heights o b t a i n e d r e g a r d l e s s of the w a v e direction. In doing so, we o v e r e s t i m a t e the w a v e heights of the m a i n sector slightly; in this case, the rise b e i n g a b o u t 1%. T h e calculation m u s t be d o n e for the n o r t h sector w h o s e w~ is m a r k e d l y s m a l l e r t h a n w.
Design waves and risk analysis The probability of exceedance for this sector, which is P (H, > h; N O R T H )  exp 
241
is shown in fig. 7.15 together with the probability of exceedance for all wave directions:
[As usual the graphs of the probabilities have been given in coordinates (X,Y) defined by (6.3).] We enter with the value of h (R) obtained regardless of the wave direction, that is h (R) = 7.90m. For the relation (6.3) between X and h, we have h (R) = 7.90m ~ X = 298.3. In the probability of exceedance for all wave directions, X  298.3 is associated with Y  264.2 and this value of Y is associated with X  263.4 in the probability of exceedance for the north sector. Hence, using once again the relation (6.3) between X and h, we obtain X   263.4 ~ h (R; N O R T H ) = 5.57 m.
150
100
5O
50
100
150
200
[2~
350
242
Chapter 7
The same procedure must be followed to get Hs (L; N O R T H ) from H,(L), the result being H, (L; N O R T H ) = 5.03 m. Then the periods Tp and Th of a sea state with an/4, of 5.03 m can be evaluated by means of (4.27) and (5.42), and prove to be Tp = 9.6s, Th = 8.8s. Finally, the maximum height of a wave which advances northwards in the lifetime of the structure is obtained by means of (7.42) and proves to be 10.5 m. Thus, the picture is h (R; N O R T H ) = 5.57 m, 2 = 6.6 hours, H (L; N O R T H )  10.5 m, Hs (L; N O R T H ) = 5.03 m, T (L; N O R T H ) = 8.8 s. In other words, the design sea state whose dominant wave direction is within the north sector has a significant wave height of 5.57 m and a duration of 6.6 hours. Moreover the design wave for this sector has a height of 10.5 m, a period of 8.8 s and the maximum probability is that it occurs in a sea state with a significant wave height of nearly 5 m. These results are used when dealing with the design of structures whose resistance depends on the wave direction (for example resistance to the waves which advance northwards being different from the resistance to the waves which advance eastwards). Naturally, as was said in the foregoing sections, the design sea state will be used for coastal structures, while the design wave will be used for offshore structures.
7.10 Corollary of risk analysis: a general relation between the confidence interval and the sampling rate
7.10.1
In sect. 6.2.4 we have shown that the classic confidence interval (based on the assumption of stochastic independence of the outcomes of a random variable) serves only as a first approximation to the actual confidence interval of P(H~ > h). This is because the outcomes of/4, obtained typically with a sampling rate of 1/3 per hour or of i per hour are not stochastically independent of one another. In sect. 6.2.4 we have also inferred that the actual confidence interval should be wider and should be located leftward with respect to the classic confidence interval. How much wider, and how much leftward? Now we are able to give some answers to these questions. The starting point of the reasoning is as follows. Let us imagine we know the P (Hs > h) of a location and we take N measurements of/4, with a sampling interval ~tsamp at this location. We aim to determine the probability that the largest measured H~ exceeds a fixed threshold h. 7.10.2
Definitions
OI  observation interval, the length of which is N . Atsamp;
243
In addition to these definitions, we shall use the definition of P(H= > h) given in sect. 6.1.3 and the definition of 3 ( L , R ) given in sect. 7.3.1.
(7.43)
proceeds from the following reasoning. The probability that the largest measured Hs in an OI exceeds h [1.h.s. of (7.43)] is smaller than (or equal to) the probability that H, exceeds h during this OI, which in its turn is equal to the probability that at least one sea storm with H= exceeding h occurs during this OI [r.h.s. of (7.43)]. Inequality (7.43) and inequality (7.27) of the encounter probability yield
(7.44)
P(Hsmax > h; N,
/~tsamp )
which taken together with (7.44) yields P (Hsmax) h; N, Atsamp) ~ Min R~H~> ~ ) , P(H, > h)N
N.
Atsamp
),
(7.45)
Let hp denote the threshold that has a given probability 1  p to be exceeded by the largest measured H= in the OI (we have already used this symbol in sect. 6.2.4 when we dealt with the classic confidence interval). The knowledge of hp enables us to obtain the confidence interval. As an example the 90% confidence interval has h0.05 as lower limit and h0.95 as upper limit, as we saw in sect. 6.2.4.
244
Chapter 7
In symbols,
hp is
defined by
Atsamp)  1  p.
4, hp ( hp
with h* P such that Min
(7.46)
. .. . IN
77, ,
 1
p.
(7.47)
(7.47) is a monotonic decreasing function of h'p, so that the hp* can be easily evaluated. Hence we have got an upper bound for hp. the example of sect. 6.2.4. The locality was Mazara del Vallo in the From tables 6.2 and 6.3 we obtain for this locality: bl0 = 73 hours,
al0
a)
from which we can evaluate P(H, > h) by means of (6.2) and R(Hs > h) by means of (7.12). The n u m b e r N of sampled values of H, was 14650 and /~tsamp was of 3 hours. F r o m (7.47) we obtain h0.05  5.75 m , h0.95  7.32 m, (/~tsamp H e n c e the values h0.05 = 5.47 m, h0.95 = 7.43 m, (stochastic independence), (7.48) 3 hours)
which were obtained in sect. 6.2.4 under the classic assumption of stochastic independence of the outcomes of Hs, nearly satisfy the general condition (7.46) (h0.05 satisfies this condition, and h0.95 is not far from satisfying it). Now, let us reduce A/samp from 3 hours to 1 hour, under the same n u m b e r N of sampled values of H, and for the same locality. From (7.47) we obtain h0.05 5.11 m, h 0 . 9 5  6.75 m, (/~tsamp 1 hour), and hence the limits (7.48) of the classic confidence interval do not satisfy the general condition (7.46). This means that, with a/~tsamp of i hour, we cannot use the classic confidence interval based on the assumption of stochastic independence of the outcomes of Hs. Indeed it is certain that the confidence interval will be located leftward with respect to the classic confidence interval. To check (7.4647) reason as follows. If hp satisfies (7.47), then P(Hsmax> h~; N, ,/~tsamp ) is
Design waves and risk analysis smaller than (or equal to) 1  p because of (7.45). Hence, the hp N, Atsamp) equal to 1  p must be smaller than (or equal to) hp. 7.10.3
245
It can be p r o v e d t h a t the u p p e r limit of the confidence interval is n e a r l y coincident with the hp given by (7.47). O n the c o n t r a r y , the lower limit is strictly smaller t h a n the h* given by (7.47). In o t h e r words, (7.46) can be t a k e n as an P e q u a l i t y for the u p p e r limit and as an inequality for the lower limit of the confidence interval: u p p e r limit of the confidence interval: lower limit of the confidence interval:
In this regard, the reader could verify that, for a small ( 1  p ) (upper limit of the confidence interval) hp tends to coincide with hp both for small /Aktsamp for which (7.47) is reduced to N . '/~/samp = 1  p, (7.49)
Atsampfor
1
p,
(7.50)
Here below, an outline of the proof. For small A/samp , the 1.h.s. of (7.43) is nearly equal to the r.h.s. Hence a small value of 1  p implies that the encounter probability is also small which in turn implies that the r.h.s. of (7.43) is nearly equal to the r.h.s, of (7.44). Indeed the encounter probability ~(L,R) proves to be nearly coincident with L/R for a small :~ (which can be verified using the general form (7.26) of :~(L,R) with a variety of distributions of the interarrival times). The conclusion is that (7.44) becomes an equality, and this equality and (7.49) imply that hp coincides with hp. For large Atsamp, the outcomes of/4, become stochastically independent of one another, and hence hp is given by
1 [1 P(H,
> hp)] u = 1  p ,
(7.51)
and, for small values of 1  p , the hp given by (7.51) approaches the hp given by (7.50). To prove this last statement, multiply and divide by P(H, > hp) the exponent N on the 1.h.s. of (7.51); bear in mind that P(H, > hp) approaches 0 as ( 1  p ) approaches 0; use the limit lim (1  x)~  e 1 ,
x+0
246
Conclusive note
Chapter 7
The solution of sect. 7.3.2 for the encounter probability was introduced into the hydrological practice by Borgman (1963). The reasoning of sect. 7.3.3 leading to the general relation for the encounter probability was developed by the author (1983 and 1986b). The solution for R*(H) (sect. 7.6.1) is due to Jasper (1956). The solutions of sects. 7.1 and 7.78 for R (Hs > h), R (H), and corollaries H(L) and Hs(L) were obtained by the author (1986ab). The solution of sect. 7.2.1 for the significant wave height with a given return period and the proof of sect. 7.10 yielding a general relation between the confidence interval and the sampling rate are novelties. Also the algorithm of sect. 7.9 is a new proposal. In common practice (cf. Tucker, 1989, and Massel, 1996) the following formula is used:
mtsampis the
h(R) 
w[ln(e/Atsamp)] 1/u.
R is obtained by means of (7.29b) from lifetime L and encounter probability ~ . The design sea state has h(R) as significant wave height, and has a duration equal to Atsamp. The design wave height is the maximum expected wave height in this sea state. A limit of this approach lies in the subjective choice of Atsamp. Here, note that P(H~ > h) is independent of Atsampwhich only affects the confidence intervals, as we have seen in sect. 7.10. Therefore R (Hs > h) proves to be proportional to the subjectively chosen Atsamp. Another limit of the common approach is that the highest wave is assumed to necessarily occur during the most severe sea state. In order to overcome this second limit, Tucker (1989) essentially suggested to resort to R*(H) [obtain the return period from L and 5;~, and compute the design wave height by means of (7.30) from this return period]. However, this approach proves to be conservative for the reason we have explained in sect. 7.6.2. For the same aim (overcoming the second limit) Krogstad (1985) had assumed that the time interval in which H~ is between h and h + dh during the lifetime was given by the deterministic product p (Hs = h)dh L, thus obtaining
e[Hmax(g ) > H ] 
1  exp
[The reasoning is essentially the same that leads to (6.26a) of the probability of exceedance of the maximum wave height in a storm of given history.] This approach becomes exact in the limit as L ~ oc, while for some finite L, it proves to be
247
conservative" the more, the smaller L is. The reason is that the time duration in which H~ is between h and h + dh during the lifetime is a r a n d o m variable, and p (H~  h ) d h L is only the mean value of this r a n d o m variable. The solutions given in this chapter remove the above mentioned limits, in that they are closed solutions under one assumption: the existence of the equivalent triangular storm with the main property described in sect. 6.6.2. This property, which can be easily checked, has been found to hold for all storm histories we have examined (both from the M e d i t e r r a n e a n Sea and from the Oceans). The concept of equivalent triangular storm yields also the formal relation, of general validity, between D(h) and P(H~ > h). [In particular, if P(H~ > h) is given by (6.2), D(h) takes on the form (7.19).] Until now, the statistics of the duration given intensity has been dealt with empirically. In particular G r a h a m (1982) and Sobey and Orloff (1999) have published some detailed studies for several areas.
References
Boccotti P., 1983 On wave height probability. Giornale del Genio Civile, 165174 (in Italian); 1986a Wave prediction for the Italian seas. Proc. 2 0 th Italian Conf. Hydraulics, 7991 (in Italian); 1986b On coastal and offshore structure risk analysis. Excerpta of the Italian Contribution to the Field of Hydraulic Eng. 1, 1936. Borgman L. E., 1963 Risk criteria. J. Waterways and Harbors. Div. ASCE 89, 135. Graham C., 1982 The parameterisation and prediction of wave height and wind speed persistence statistics for oil industry operational planning purposes. Coastal Eng. 6, 303329. Jasper N. H., 1956 Statistical distribution patterns of ocean waves and waveinduced ship stresses and motions, with engineering applications. Trans. Soc. Nav. Arch. & Mar. Eng. 64, 375432. Krogstad H. E., 1985 Height and period distribution of extreme waves. Appl. Ocean Res. 7, 158165. Massel S. R., 1996 Ocean surface waves: their physics and prediction. World Scientific, 1491. Puertos del Estado (Madrid), 1990 Maritime Works RecommendationsROM 0.290. Sobey R. J. and Orloff L.S., 1999 Intensitydurationfrequency summaries for wave climate. Coastal Eng. 36, 3758. Tucker M. J., 1989 An improved "Battjes" method for predicting the probability of extreme waves. Appl. Ocean Res. 11,212218.
248
249
(a)
wind
I I I I
(b)
/
tl t2 t3 t4
Fig. 8.1 (a) Four fetches. (b) Time histories of H, at the ends of the four fetches under the action of a steady wind.
250
Chapter 8
be as in fig. 8.lb. For a time interval (0, tl) Hs will grow at the same way at all crosssections. From an instant tl, H~ will no longer grow at @, while it will keep on growing in the same way at all other crosssections. From an instant t2, Hs will cease growing also at @, while it will keep on in the same way at downdrift crosssections, and so on. Second idea. The value of Hs of the steady condition, that is Hsl at @, Ms2 at @, and so on, depends on the fetch 9 / a n d on the wind speed u through a relation of the kind
gHs
A similar relation proceeds also from the J O N S W A P spectrum, or more exactly, from the set of results of the J O N S W A P project (Hasselmann et al., 1973). Indeed the researchers of this project suggested the formulae A  0 . 0 7 6 ( g ~ f ) '22 ,
~pu =
g
27r 3.5
(8.1)
which, taken with the relation (4.25) between m0 and aJp, yield u2 = 1.26.10 3 (8.2)
We shall use (8.2) to evaluate how Hs varies along y . To this end, we define
dHs
A100 d~@" Lpo
H,
This gives the per cent variation of Hs in one dominant wavelength along the wind direction. A can be rewritten in the equivalent form
A  100
d \ u2
d(g~2)
gLpo /
u5
gHs
/,/2
where the formula for the derivative of gHs//U2 with respect to g~"/l,t 2 proceeds from (8.2), and the formula for gLpo/U2proceeds from (8.1), with the result that A is related to g ~ ' / u 2 by the equation A  0.715 \ u2 j . (8.3)
251
Let us consider a case of practical interest, a fetch of 300 km with a wind of 100 km/hour. We have
1,12
= 38oo
that together with (8.3) yields A  0.04. That is an /4, which varies 0.04% in a space of Lpo. Clearly this is the largest variation, the one along the wave direction. Thus we realize that in the open sea, an area with sides of ten wavelengths can be very well regarded as a homogeneous wave field, that is a field where the variations of H, from one point to another are negligible.
rl(x, y, t)  Z
i=1 N
cos0i
(8.4a)
O (x, y, z, t)  g Z
i=1
aiaJi_~ cosh [ki (d + z)] sin (kixsinOi + kiy cos0i cosh (ki d)
coit + Gi) ,
(8.4b)
O.)i
where the relation between the wave number ki and the angular frequency
is
kitanh(kid) 
0.12
i g
The ith term of the sum (8.4a) gives the surface displacement (and the ith term of the sum 8.4b gives the velocity potential) of a periodic wave of amplitude ai, frequency c0i and phase ci, whose direction of advance makes an angle 0i with the yaxis. From sect. 1.10 we know that the ith term of the sum (8.4a) and the ith term of the sum (8.4b) satisfy the system of the linear flow equations in the homogeneous form, that is with f ( t ) = 0. It follows that the sum (8.4a) and the sum (8.4b) also satisfy the same system of linear equations in the homogeneous form. Naturally, in
252
Chapter 8
order to satisfy the system of linear equations with f (t) generally different from zero, it suffices to add to (8.4b) the term
1 it f(t')dt' P o
which does not modify the particle velocity nor the pressure fluctuation. The theory of the sea states, as stated in sect. 4.2, requires that (i) N tends to infinity; (ii) ci are distributed uniformly on the circle and are stochastically independent of one another; (iii) a~i are different from one another; (iv) ai are all of the same order. 8.2.2 r / a n d ~ are stationary Gaussian processes The surface displacement at any fixed point x, y is given by
N
ai
f](t)  Z
where
(8.5)
i=1
gi  
(ei +
(8.6)
The gi, like the ei, are distributed uniformly on the circle and are stochastically independent of one another, so that (8.5) represents a stationary Gaussian process (the proof was given in sect. 5.1). The velocity potential at any fixed point x, y, z is given by
oh(t)   ~ { t i s i n ( w i t 4 ~i),
i=1
(8.7)
where
Cli  
gaicdi
The fact that the ai are of the same order implies that also the hi are of the same order, and hence (8.7) represents again a stationary Gaussian process. 8.2.3 The pressure head waves beneath the water surface The fluctuating pressure head proceeds from the velocity potential (8.4b) through the Bernoulli equation. The result is U cosh [ki (d + z)] COS (ki X s i n ~lph(X, y , z , t )  Z ai /=1 cosh(kid)
0i +
ki y c o s
0 i  0.)i t _Af_~i).
253
A t any fixed point x, y, z (we m e a n a point that remains always b e n e a t h the water surface), rbh is a r a n d o m function given by N Tip h (l)  Z hi COS(0)//.3f_ ~i), (8.8) i=1 where
gi has
ai
cosh
(8.9)
From the point of view of mathematics, (8.8) represents a new stationary Gaussian process, which can be verified by reasoning as we have done in sect. 8.2.2. The spectrum of r/ph(t) is defined by the equation
E ((.x); z) ~(.,u  Z 1 T h2i i
CO i <
C O_ql_80,3
z)Sw
Z  ~ a~ f o r / s u c h
1
(8.10)
because of the relation (8.9). T h e s u m m a t i o n on the r.h.s, of (8.10) is equal to E (w) 8w, and c o n s e q u e n t l y E(a3; Z)  csh2 [k(d + z)] E(w). cosh 2 (kd)
1 ......
ce waves
(8.11)
2 1
/~ pressurehead waves
o = 0.1
o 0 1 2 o
, J
:=~/~.
Fig. 8.2 Normalized autocovariance and spectrum of the surface waves and of the pressure head waves at a depth of Lp0/10 beneath the mean water level, on deep water. (Obtained by means of 8.11.)
254
Chapter 8
Fig. 8.2 shows the spectrum of the surface waves and the spectrum of the pressure head waves at a certain depth beneath the mean water level (equation 8.11). We see that the peak of E(aJ; z) occurs at a frequency slightly smaller than COp. Moreover, we see that the spectrum beneath the water surface shrinks, because it sheds its high frequency tail. Both these p h e n o m e n a are due to the fact that the small wave components undergo an attenuation with depth, which is the larger the greater is frequency.
8.3 T h e d i r e c t i o n a l s p e c t r u m
8.3.1 Definition and characteristic f o r m s The amplitudes, frequencies and directions of the small wave components give rise to a directional spectrum: S (co, 0)8co 80  Z  2  a~ for i such that co <
i
(8.12)
In words: the product 2S (co, 0) 8co 80 represents the sum of the square amplitudes of the small wave components whose frequencies wi and angles 0/ fall in the small rectangle (co,co + 8co; 0, 0 + 80) [see fig. 8.3]. The definitions (8.12) of S (co, 0) and (4.2) of E(w) yield E (co) S (co, O) dO. (8.13)
0
The directional spectrum is generally given in the form S (w, 0)  E (w)D (0; w), (8.14)
2~
0+B0
1 t Sat
0'1
~o
~o+8~
frequency
Fig. 8.3 Definition of directional spectrum: the product S (co,0)8co 80 is equal to the partial sum 1 a 2 for i such that coi and 0i belong to the small rectangle.
27,
i
255
where D(0;~) is the directional spreading function. Clearly, the relation (8.13) between E (~) and S (~, 0) implies
2~ D (0; c~)dO  1.
(8.15)
The directional spreading function of the wind waves on deep water has a typical shape that usually is fitted by the cosinepower function D(O; a J )  K ( n ) c o s 2 n [ 2 ( O   O ) ] w i t h n  n ( c o ) , where K (n) is the normalizing factor
g(n) cos2nOdO
(8.16)
(8.17)
being necessary to comply with (8.15). 0 is the angle the dominant wave direction makes with the yaxis. As to the parameter n, it generally depends on frequency oJ and this is why we have written D (0; o3). Typically, n takes on its largest value at the peak frequency %, and consequently the minimum directional spread is associated with this frequency. Mitsuyasu et al. (1975) suggest n
 np (c~/%) 5

if oJ < %, if >
(8.18)
n p   7 " 5 " 1 0  3 \ u2 j
/~
/ n =20
(00)
_~ 2
_~ 2
Fig. 8.4 The cosine power (COS 2n) directional spreading function.
256
Chapter 8
The graph of function (8.16) is a "bellshaped" curve where the sharper the peak, the larger is n[see fig. 8.4]. One more remark: n is a real number, as we can infer from (8.18), and the cosine of i (0  0) may be negative, so that cos 2" is understood 2 to be the nth power of the square cosine. Of course a more appropriate form is
1 (0 cos I2
0)]
2n
8.3.2 The nondimensional directional spectrum It is convenient to resort to the nondimensional directional spectrum
Y ( w , O)  S(wcop, O)/(Ag2co~ 5 ).
(8.19)
With the J O N S W A P spectrum and the directional spreading function of Mitsuyasu et al. (1975), we have
(8.20)

npW 5
if
glpW2"5 if
(8.21)
Thus the n o n d i m e n s i o n a l directional s p e c t r u m 5P(w, 0) d e p e n d s on three parameters: X1 and ~2 O f the J O N S W A P spectrum and rip of the directional spreading function. For the illustrations henceforth we shall take the following characteristic values X1 = 3, ~)(~2= 0.08, np = 20.
8.3.3 A typical double integral concerning the directional spectrum Dealing with the mathematical analysis of a sea state we have to evaluate typical integral 0 0
(8.22)
where f is some function depending on the special problem, and X, Y, z, T are spacetime variables. Replacement of co with w  co/COp and use of the nondimensional wave n u m b e r
~ / ( w )  2rc/Lpo
prove to be very helpful for this job.
(8.23)
Analysis of the sea states in the spacetime F r o m the definition (8.23) and the linear dispersion rule (1.23), we obtain /(w)tanh
257
27r~ (w)T
f (x)  xtanh
7r Lpo
is equal to W2. This function is increasing, so that the abscissa associated with a given value of the ordinate is easily o b t a i n e d numerically. Using (8.19) and (8.23) we rewrite (8.22) in the form 4 typical integral  A g 2C~p
f 27r~. (w) X
Lpo
,27r/(w)
Lpo
Y ,27rZ.~(w)
z Lpo
'
DZ
Area(~): depth d
Chapter 8
x sin 00 + ~
(8.25)
r/(x, y, t) = a cos (kx sinO + ky cosO cot + e), where k satisfies the linear dispersion rule (1.23), and
(8.26)
ao(
1  sinZO/tanh2(kd)
1
sin20
(8.27a)
(8.27b) (8.27c)
Equation (8.27a) is simply an alternative form of (2.45). Inequality (8.27c) is the mathematical way to say: if the wave advances landward on deep water, then it advances landward also on shallow water. Equation (8.27b) and inequality (8.27c) imply that 0 and 00 belong to the same quadrant, and they also imply that [sin 01 < tanh (kd). From (8.27b) we get 00arcsin[ and hence: dOo IcosOl/tanh (kd) dO. v/1  sin20/tanh2(kd) (8.30) sin0 ] tanh (kd) ' (8.29) (8.28)
This last relation shows how does the angle vary on deep water because of a variation dO of the angle on water depth d. This relation will be used shortly. Let us now complete the analysis of (8.2526), noting that e is linked to e0 in a not easy way. We have c = e0 nt/kg, where Ae depends on angle 00, on frequency a~ and on how the water depth changes from area @ to area @. For getting Ae we should be able to solve the problem: what is the phase angle between two fixed points P0 and P1, one in area @ and the other in area @? This problem is very difficult because the known expression of the propagation speed c, being exact on a constant depth, leads to an error for a sloping bottom; and this error should have some nonnegligible effects on Ae, even in the limit for the bottom slope approaching zero (given
259
that, in this limit, the distance between P0 and P~ tends to infinity). But luckily, the solution to the Ae problem is useless for our goals. Indeed, it suffices to know that e is equal to e0 plus some terms depending on angle 00, frequency c~ and function d(y). 8.4.2 The step f r o m periodic waves to windgenerated waves A sea state is the sum of a very large number N of small wave components with frequencies, directions and phases generally different from one another. Therefore the sea state is given by
rl(x, y, t)
x sinOoz +  ~i y
(.z)2
c O S O o z   coil I Co
i)
in area @,
rl(x, y, t )  Z
where the amplitudes a i are related to the amplitudes a0i by (8.27a), and the angles 0z are related to the angles 00z by (8.27bc). If the small wave components in area @ satisfy the four assumptions (i)(iv) of sect. 8.2.1, then also the small wave components in area @ do satisfy these assumptions. Specifically, since e i is equal to e0i plus a term independent of e0i, the e i are uniformly distributed over the circle and are stochastically independent of one another like the c0i. Therefore r/(t) at any fixed point x, y represents a stationary Gaussian process. 8.4.3 The relation between the directional spectrum on a given water depth and the directional spectrum on deep water From (8.27a), (8.28), (8.29), and (8.30), the following relation proceeds between the directional spectrum S (co, 0) on a water depth d and the deep water spectrum
So (~, 0):
S (a~, 0)
'
arcsin[ sinO
tanh(kd) (8.31)
In using this relation, bear in mind that angles 0 belong to the same quadrant. and arcsin sinO ] tanh (kd)
260
Chapter 8
If So is the JONSWAPMitsuyasu spectrum, the directional spectrum S on water depth d becomes sinh (2kd) ~s [ = tanh 2 (kd)~h~d) + 2kd] Ag2 exp

S(~,O)
exp/lnXlexPk~ 0 otherwise,
I
(~~.)~ }K(.).
(8.32)
where 00 denotes the dominant direction on deep water. [Strictly speaking, a~p should be replaced by COp0that is the peak frequency on deep water. However the difference between c% (on the given water depth d) and a~p0,usually, proves to be very small so that it is convenient to reason as if the peak frequency does not change from deep to shallow water.] The nondimensional directional spectrum on water depth d proceeds from (8.32) and the definition (8.19):
m
cos2" ffarcsin
{1 i sin 11 }
tank (2 7(w) ~p0) ~00
 0 otherwise,
where {(w)is given by (4.24), and ~ (w) by (8.24). We should use the form (8.20) of Y(w, 0) on deep water, and the form (8.33) on shallow water (provided that the contour lines are straight). In fact, in what follows we shall use (8.20) on both deep water and on shallow water. This is for appreciating the effects of the bottom depth, under the same directional spectrum. However, for the illustration of the shoalingrefraction effects we shall resort to (8.33). To check (8.31), use the two following equations:
s (~, o) ~ ~o  { ~ .1 ~ a2 for/suchthata~<coi<a~+Sco
261
_ {
sinh(2kd) ~ 1 sin20/tanh2(kd) 1 a2 tanh (kd)[sinh (2kd) + 2kd] 1  sin20 ~ ~ 0~ for i such that co < a~ < co+ 6~ and
i
[ sin0 I sin0 arcsin tanh (kd) < 00i < arcsin tanh(kd) = 0 otherwise,
So 7
]cosO/tanh(kd)
~1  sin20/tanh 2(kd)
OJ i <
(.U3r~(.~) and
You obtain the rightmost equality (8.34), using the relation (8.27a) to replace ai with a0i. Then use equation (8.29) which relates the angle on deep water to the angle on water depth d. Finally, use (8.30) which gives the variation of the deep water angle for a given variation of the angle on water depth d. 1 a2 To achieve (8.31) you have to express the summation Z  ~  0i on the r.h.s, of (8.34) in terms of So, and clear the fractions. 8.4.4 S h o a l i n g  r e f r a c t i o n
effects o n the w i n d w a v e s
The nondimensional directional spectrum (8.33) can be used to get the shoalingrefraction curves for the wind waves. Indeed the quotient between the variance on some given water depth d and the variance on deep water is f j~ 2~.~ 0 Jo
(72
~7
(w, 0) dO dw
for the g i v e n  g po
as+
(s.35)
./~(w, 0)dO dw
0 0
Lpo
Cx:3
Fig. 8.6 shows the shoalingrefraction curve, that is to say the square root of (8.35) as a function of d/Lpo, for two different angles of the dominant wave direction on deep water. We can get also the frequency spectrum on the given water depth:
E(wa~p)  Ag2c~p 5
o
. ~ ( w , 0)d0.
As an example, fig. 8.7 shows the spectrum on water depth d = Lp0/10, for two different angles of the dominant wave direction on deep water. F r o m fig. 8.6 we see that the shoalingrefraction curve of the wind waves is very close to the corresponding curve of the periodic waves. Then, from fig. 8.7 we see that shoalingrefraction has only a small effect on the spectrum shape. The consequence is that the frequency spectrum on shallow water can be taken as equal 2 (this being as the deep water spectrum multiplied by the constant factor cr2/cr0 constant with respect to frequency co).
262
Chapter 8
(a) 0o=0
O'
o0 \
periodicwaves
wind waves
l 00

d/L~, d/Lo .1
!
.2
.3
.4
.5
o0
00
.1
.2
.3
'
14
d/L~, d/Lo
.5
l
. ,
Fig. 8.6 Shoalingrefraction of the periodic waves and of the wind waves.
Perhaps this will seem a disappointing picture, in the sense that, after rather hard work to get the directional spectrum on shallow water, we find the shoalingrefraction effects to be nearly obvious (fig. 8.6) or nearly negligible (fig. 8.7). Really, shoalingrefraction of the wind waves gets interesting essentially when one deals with the length of the wave crest. This face of shoalingrefraction will be illustrated in chap. 10, using the quasideterminism theory and the nondimensional directional spectrum (8.33). Note that those of fig. 8.7 are normalized spectra, indeed each spectrum is related to its maximum value. Accordingly, the figure enables us to conclude the shallow water spectrum to be nearly equal to the deep water spectrum apart from a constant factor. That is it enables us to conclude, as we have done, that the shape of the shallow water spectrum is nearly equal to the shape of the deep water spectrum.
263
Oo=0
1
"
dlLp > 1
r/rp
 ,  
0o=45"
1
"
J I
d/Lp > 1
1
TIT_
Fig. 8.7 Normalized autocovariance and spectrum on shallow water and on deep water. Shallow water: continuous line. Deep water: dashed line. We see that the differences are very small.
8.5 R e f l e c t i o n o f the w i n d  g e n e r a t e d w a v e s
8.5.1 A big d i f f e r e n c e with r e s p e c t to the p e r i o d i c w a v e s T h e surface d i s p l a c e m e n t ~l(x,y,t) and the velocity p o t e n t i a l ~ ( x , y , z , t ) of a periodic w a v e b e f o r e a vertical reflecting wall are given by (1.57ab). H e n c e ~7and of a sea state, which is the sum of a very large n u m b e r N of small periodic waves, are given by
N
~7(x, y, t)  2 E
i=1 N
(8.36a)
(x, y, z, t)  2g E
i=1
In o t h e r words: if we put a vertical reflecting wall in the p l a n e y  0, the r a n d o m wave field (8.4ab) takes on the f o r m (8.36ab).
264
Chapter 8
Reasoning as usual, we can easily verify that both ~(t) and q$(t) at any fixed point are stationary Gaussian processes. But an important novelty arises: these r a n d o m processes are no longer h o m o g e n e o u s in space. Indeed it is apparent that the characteristics of ~(t) (as well as of q$(t)) depend on the distance y from the wall. In particular the very variance of r/(t) depends on y, so that we shall denote it by the symbol cr2 (y). F r o m (8.36a) we have
0 2
(y)  4 Z Z aiajcos(kiycosOi)cos(kjycosOj).
i=1 j=l
(8.37)
since 0.)i (.@ if i j. The contribution to the summation (8.37) from the small components with co < aJg < co + 8aJ and 0 < 0i < 0 + 80 is equal to 4S (co, 0) 6~ 60 cos 2 (kycosO), and hence or2 (y)  4
Finally, replacing the dimensional variable co with the nondimensional w, we arrive at Y ( w , 0)cos 2 2TrY(w) y cr2(y) = o o
Lpo
cos0 dO dw . (8.38)
2(0)
I ~ 1 2 ~ y (w, O)dOdw
o o
Fig. 8.8 shows the function (8.38) for the basic condition of deep water and waves attacking the wall orthogonally (we mean that the dominant direction of the incident waves is orthogonal to the wall). For a comparison, the figure also shows
cos
of the periodic waves (for the same condition of wave attack orthogonal to the wall). This time the difference between wind waves and periodic waves is really amazing! The variance of the periodic waves fluctuates between maxima equal to the m a x i m u m at the wall and minima equal to zero, and the fluctuations go on as far as an infinite distance from the wall. The variance of the wind generated waves is a d a m p e d oscillatory function of the distance from the wall; and, at only one or two
265
a~(y) [ i ~ ] periodic
a~(o) ,
[~i
/",,
i
; ,
i,,
i ",
/,,,
........ i;i
......
0.5
0.5
lyl/Lp, iYl/L
Fig. 8.8 Graph of 02 (y)/02 (0) [02= variance of the surface displacement, y = distance from the wall]. Continuous line: wind waves. Dashed line: periodic waves. It is the basic case of deep water and orthogonal attack.
wavelengths from the wall, it approaches a constant value being equal to half the value at the wall. The difference is so big that the person who found it could hardly believe it. Indeed one of the basic notions of the wave theory is that nodes and antinodes follow one another as far as an infinite distance from the wall. Now it emerged that the wind waves have a pseudonode at a quarter wavelength from the wall, a pseudoantinode at a halfwavelength from the wall, and then nodes and antinodes disappear all together. The first reaction was that the formula (8.38) or the calculations are wrong! But it didn't take long to realize that it was not so [the reader is invited to verify it himself, checking slowly the few steps from (8.36a) to (8.38), and evaluating numerically the two integrals, with the formulae (8.20) for Y ( w , 0) and (8.24) for / ( w ) ] . Then the question arises, how is it possible that the sea waves differ so greatly from the periodic waves where reflection is concerned? The answer to this question came from the quasideterminism theory. Hence, we shall give it in chap. 10. Here we conclude with two further remarks. Firstly, under the same spectrum, the pseudonodes and antinodes get more apparent on shallow water (cf. fig. 8.9a with fig. 8.8). In particular, we see that the first local maximum of 0 2 (y)/02 (0), the one at a halfwavelength from the wall, on shallow water ( d / L p o = 0.1) is equal to 0.71, while on deep water it is equal to 0.64. Secondly, under the same water depth, the pseudonodes and antinodes get even less apparent if the dominant direction of the incident waves is not wallorthogonal (cf. fig. 8.9b with fig. 8.8). In particular, we see that the first local maximum of
266
Chapter 8
cr2 (y)/cr 2 (0) after the wall, in the case of the oblique reflection (0  45 ) is equal to 0.53, whereas in the case of the o r t h o g o n a l reflection it is equal to 0.64. W e shall see in chap. 10 that even these second order differences (that is the variations of the differences b e t w e e n wind waves and periodic waves due to the water depth or the angle of wave attack) find a clear explanation in the light of the quasideterminism theory. 8.5.2 D i f f r a c t i o n
coefficients
The diffraction coefficient Cd of the waves interacting with some solid obstacle is defined as the ratio b e t w e e n the root m e a n square surface displacement at a given
(a) d/L,0 = 1 , 0=0
................. .:__!, ........ , a'(y) ~11 [ periodic waves [ :'/. . . . . . . . . . ~Z': . . . . ....... a'(O)
]i~ /
1,,,,,
/ ,,,, / /i \
7 / /
0.5
0.5
(b) dlLpo > l _,'._2,
J.
lyl/Lp, lYl/L
, 0=45"
a'(O)
.,<y)
~",
',.........................
"/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . ..... . ,,
[periodic waves i \
/ "'
,"
0.5
~d w a v e s
I. I I I JI Ii I
1 l i I
/ I
0.5
lYl/LI,, lYl/L
Fig. 8.9 Once again cr2 (y)/cr 2 (0) for: (a) shallow water and orthogonal attack; (b) deep water and inclined attack.
267
point and the root m e a n square surface displacement of the incident waves (for the periodic waves, Cd coincides with the ratio between the wave height at the given point and the height of the incident waves, as we saw in chap. 1). In the case of the infinitely long wall we have
Cd(y) 
cr (y)
cr (y)
cr (0)
where cr is the root m e a n square surface displacement of the wave field (8.4a) that would be there without the wall. The quotient cr(0)/c~ is equal to 2 and hence we have the relation or(y) Ca (y)  2 ~ that enables us to deduce Cd from the function cr2 (y)/o 2 (0) of figs. 8.8 and 8.9ab. At the wall Cd is equal to 2, and starting from about one wavelength from the wall, where cr2 (y)/cr 2 (0) takes on the constant value 1
2'
it becomes equal 2 , / 1
V2
 v~
rl(r, fl, t)  ~
i=1
ai [F (r, fl; odi, Oi)cos(cdit Jr ci) q G(r, fl; coi, Oi)sin(cdit q c / ) ] ,
N _
a i od i I
(8.39a)
O ( r, fl, z, t)  g Z i=,
cosh
[ki (d +
z)]
cosh(kid)
[G ( r,
f l ; (.z)i ,
Oi ) c o s ( odi t + Ci )
@
(8.39b)
where r and fl are the polar coordinates [see the definition sketch of fig. 1.17]. The ith terms of these two summations represent the flow field due to an incident wave of amplitude az, frequency wi, phase c~, whose direction makes an angle Oi with the yaxis. The functions F (r,/3; a~, 0) and G (r,/3; co, 0) were defined in sect. 1.12.1. H e r e too, it can be easily verified that both ~7(t) and 0(t), at any fixed point, r e p r e s e n t some s t a t i o n a r y G a u s s i a n processes. Of course, they are nonh o m o g e n e o u s r a n d o m processes, and the variance cr2(r, fl) of the surface displacement here can vary very much from one point to another, and especially from a point before the wall to a point behind the wall. F r o m (8.39a) we get
N
0 2
(r, [4) 
268
Chapter 8
which can be expressed in terms of the directional spectrum S (co, 0) of the incident waves: e ~ r 27r rr2(r,fl)  / / S(c,O)[F2(r,fl; c, O) q G2(r, fl;c, O)] dO dco.
3 o do
Hence, the diffraction coefficient, that is equal to the square root of the quotient cr2(r, fl)/cr 2 [or2 being the variance of the incident waves], proves to be j ~ j e ~ y (w, 0)[F e (r, fl; w, 0) +
6 2
Ca(r, fl) 
o o
ec
2rr
J 0 I 0 Y(w,O)dOdw
where functions F and G have been expressed in terms of w rather than of because of the relation w  ~/~p. Figs. 8.10 and 8.11 show the diffraction coefficient as a function of the nondimensional coordinates x/Lp and y/Lp, respectively, for the orthogonal reflection (0  0) and for a case of oblique reflection [0  45 , J ( w , 0) given by (8.20) for 10 01 < 45 , otherwise J ( w , 0)  0]. The two figures retain their validity for every depth (under the same spectrum). Figs. 8.10 and 8.11 should be compared respectively with fig. 1.19 and fig. 1.20. The comparison shows that (i) in the more sheltered area of the geometric shadow (that is, close to the wall and far from the wall's tip), the Cd of the wind waves is practically coincident with the Cd of the periodic waves; (ii) within the dark part of the geometric shadow [see figs. 8.10 and 8.11], the Cd of the wind waves is at least 50% greater than the Cd of the periodic waves; (iii) along the wavebeaten wall, the Cd of the wind waves takes on the constant value 2 at a short distance from the breakwater's tip, while the Cd of the periodic waves shows an infinite sequence of local maxima greater than 2 and local minima smaller than 2. It is apparent that the really important matter is (ii), that is the very big difference between the Ca of the wind waves and the C~ of the periodic waves in the dark area. We shall see in chap. 10 that also this new difference between the wind waves and the periodic waves gets a clear explanation in the light of the theory of quasideterminism.
m
Note that it suffices to specify r/Leo, fl, w, 0, and d/Lpo to obtain functions F and G. In order to realize this point, please go back to the equations (1.60af) defining these functions, and verify that
U 1 
(8.41a) (8.41b)
0).
269
.97
i 
..
..
1.00
.93
I 1.66 I
i
.34
.20
.14
.12
.10
.09
.17 .16
2
.13 .13
3
.11 .11
4
.10 .10
5
.09 .09:,
XJLp 6
(b)
1:00 2:17 2.'13 2:02 2~00 2:01 2~01 2:01 2~00 2~00 2~00I
o ' o'.5 ' i ' I15 ' ~. ' 2'.5"x/L"
Fig. 8.10 Diffraction coefficient Cd of the wind waves for the orthogonal attack. Comparing this figure with fig. 1.19, you will note that, in the dark area, the Cd of the wind waves is at least 50% greater than the Cd of the periodic waves. (a)
y/Lp
6 1.00 1.00 1.00 .98 .95 .89 .83 .76 ,69
.98
.9~
.92
.s9
.85
.79
.77/
~/.60~1.54
: //~2
.94
.81
/. .~ _ ~ 4 4 38 i!34
.87 / 6 7 /
1.00 1.00
.4.6 .34
2
.37 .~'~32:28.~ .3
3
.27
4
,2,~
5
.23
6 x/Lp
(b)
1101 1~76 1196 2103 2105 2~05 2104 2.03 03 2103 02 I
o
X/Lp
' 0'.5 ' i ' 115 ' 2 ' 2'.5'
Fig. 8.11 Diffraction coefficient Cd of the wind waves for an inclined attack. Here too, in the dark area, the Cd of the wind waves is at least 50% greater than the Ca of the periodic waves (compare with fig. 1.20).
270
Chapter 8
8.7 Longcrested random waves: the link between periodic waves and windgenerated waves
8.7.1 Twodimensional and threedimensional random waves The windgenerated waves are random and shortcrested. Random, because each wave is generally different from the following wave. Shortcrested, because they are threedimensional. The differences in size and shape are due to the bandwidth; the shortcrestedness is due to the directional spread. With regard to this, the reader will have noted that for all problems concerning the wave variability (e.g. wave height distribution and periodheight regression) the directional spread was not used. Indeed, as far as chap. 7, it was not necessary to introduce the directional spectrum. Now, in the two foregoing sections we have met two great differences between the wind waves and the periodic waves. We have seen that in the wind waves the nodes and antinodes disappear starting from about one wavelength from the breakwater; and we have seen that in the sheltered area there is a wide region where the Cd of the wind waves is at least 50% larger than the Cd of the periodic waves. Thus we wonder, do these great differences depend on the bandwidth or on the directional spread? Of course, if we succeed in answering this question, we shall be able also to predict the different effects of different sea states. For example, if the bandwidth grows under the same directional spread do nodes and antinodes get even less apparent? And do the wave heights in the sheltered region increase further? The question, whether the great differences between wind waves and periodic waves depend on the bandwidth or on the directional spread, is also useful to find our way in the world of the wave tanks. Indeed the laboratory tanks, for a given frequency spectrum, can generate waves with no directional spread (longcrested waves or 2D random waves), and waves with a directional spread (shortcrested waves, or 3D random waves). It is apparent that the first ones are cheaper than the second ones, because the 2D random waves are generated by a single wave paddle, while the 3D random waves require a more complex array of small independent paddles. The reader can probably see where we are driving at. On the one hand it is useless resorting to the expensive 3D waves to study some phenomenon that depends only on the frequency spectrum; on the other hand it is misleading to resort to the 2D waves to study a phenomenon that is affected by the directional spread. For example, if we wanted to study how the height of the pressure head wave reduces itself from the water surface to the seabed, it would certainly be sufficient to resort to the 2D waves. Indeed, we have seen in sect. 8.2 this attenuation depends only on the frequency spectrum. 8.7.2 Special analytical forms for the twodimensional random waves The mathematical treatment of the 2D random waves can be done using the formulae for the 3D random waves with a very small directional spread, that is with
271
a very large value of the exponent n of the directional spreading function D (0; co). Of course, we can also obtain some special solutions for the 2D waves, which are valuable because of a greater simplicity. For example, the 2D random waves before a vertical breakwater are expressed by
N
rl(x,y,t)  2~~aicos(kixsinOcoit
i=1
Jrci)cos(kiycosO),
(8.42a)
(x, y, z, t)  2g ~_~N aia37, 1 cosh[ki(d + z)] sin (k~x sinO  edit Jr ci)cos(kiycosO).cosh(kid)
/=1
(8.42b)
Oi  0 gi.
The variance of the surface displacement (8.42a) is
N
o 2 ( y )  4 . i~l ~ics2(kiycs 0), 1 a2 from which it follows a2 (y) (72(0) Y cos0 dw 0 { (w) cos 2 2rc~ (w) Lpo
iOG{'(w) dw
0
Similarly, the 2D random waves interacting with i a semiinfinite vertical breakwater are given by the formulae (8.39ab) with Oi O, and consequently the variance at a fixed point r,/3 is
c. (r, 9)
Io

~ {(w)dw
8.7.3 A r e the twodimensional r a n d o m waves closer to the wind waves or to the periodic waves? Fig. 8.12 shows the quotient crZ(y)/cr2(0) before an infinitely long vertical breakwater for (a) the periodic waves;
272
Chapter 8
1
a2(y)
:\
PERIODIC WAVES
a'(0)
0.5
00 a~(Y) / a'(0) ~
0.5
0.5
1.5
lYl/L
IIRREGULAR WAVES2D [
0.65
0.5
1.5
,:,..~"~/rp2
a'(y)
W I N _ _ _ _ _ D _ D W A V E _ _ _ _ _ _ S (3I)___~) S
0.5
o.s
1.s
Iyl/L,, 2
Fig. 8.12 Comparison between periodic waves, long crested irregular waves and wind waves, with regard to reflection. We see the long crested waves behave like the wind waves.
273
y/t.
6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1.13 1.14 1.11 .86 .90 .94 1.52
/
I k53 I 153
.28
.26 .24 .22
.is
.17 .16
.14
.14 .13
.12
.12 .11 .11
.10
.10 .10 .10
.09
.09 .09 .09 I
/
PERIODIC WAVES
1.07 1.09
I k54 I
/
.16 ,.1~
i
y/Lp 6 1.09 1.09 1.06 1.02 .98 1.00 1.o0
i
.91 .95 .98 1.02 1.06
;
1.52
i
.30 .29 .28 .26 .24 .22 .21
i
.20 .19 .18 .17 .16 .15 .15
i
.15 .15 .14 .13 .13 .12 .12
4
.12 .12 .12 .11 .11 .11 ,1
;
.11 .10 .10 .10 .10 .09 ,09
x/L
I I I
IRREGULAR
WAVES
2D
i
y/t,p
6 .89 .92 .94 .97 1.00
i
6 ~L"
~.43~:~:!~.32~........... 16 :i i~ :~ iii:i ~ ~ :8~ i: .15 .17 .20 .17 .16 2 .14 .13 .13 3 .13 .12 .11 .1 4 .14 .12 .11 .10 .lO .IO 5
WIND WAVES
(3D)
Fig. 8.13 Comparison between periodic waves, long crested irregular waves and wind waves, with regard to diffraction. Here the long crested waves behave like the periodic waves.
274
Chapter 8
(b) the 2D random waves; (c) the wind waves (3D random waves). We see the function cr2 (y)/cr2(0) to be practically the same for the 2D random waves and for the wind waves. Hence, we can conclude that the great difference between wind waves and periodic waves, as far as reflection is concerned, is due to the bandwidth. Even in the absence of directional spread, the aforesaid great difference would remain unchanged. [Really, if the dominant direction of the incident waves is not wallorthogonal, the directional spread also somewhat affects or2 (y)/~2 (0)1. Fig. 8.13 extends the comparison between periodic waves, 2D random waves and wind waves into diffraction. Specifically, the figure shows the diffraction coefficient Cd in the sheltered area behind a semiinfinite vertical breakwater. Here, as we can see, the matter changes. The difference between wind waves and 2D random waves is big, while there is a little difference between the 2D random waves and the periodic waves. Indeed we see that the Cd of the 2D random waves are nearly coincident with the Cd of the periodic waves. Conclusion: concerning reflection, the 2D random waves are very close to the wind waves, while for diffraction, the 2D random waves are very close to the periodic waves. Referring to the organic evolution we think of the periodic waves as the ancestors, the wind waves as the descendants, and the 2D waves as the link between ancestors and descendants.
8.8 Direct proportion between the maximum expected wave height and the diffraction coefficient
As we have seen, the waves on the time domain in each of the fields we have considered represent some stationary Gaussian processes. As a consequence, the probability of exceedance of the wave height at any fixed point is given by (5.45), and the maximum expected wave height in a given interval At is given by (5.5759). Naturally, if the wave field is nonhomogeneous because the windgenerated waves interact with some solid body, the significant wave height generally varies from one point to another. That is we have
At
(843,
where we write ~* (x, y) and T (x, y) because the narrowbandedness parameter and the mean period generally vary from one point to another.
275
F r o m (8.43) we obtain the ratio between the maximum expected wave height at any fixed point x, y and the m a x i m u m expected wave height if the solid obstacle ( b r e a k w a t e r or something else) was not there. This ratio is J 0 11exp 1 1 + ga* 4 (x, y) u2 7(x, du
Hmax(X,y)
Y)
Hmax
I~
0
{1 
[ exp 
where, of course, ~b* and T without the specification (x, y) refer to the incident waves. Typically, the quotient between the two integrals on the r.h.s. (8.44) proves to be very close to 1, so that we can assume
1+
4 ~* lg2]}~du
Cd(X,y),
(8.44)
nmax( x , y )
Hm~x
~ Cd (X, y ) .
(8.45)
For the step from (8.44) to (8.45) we reason on the autocovariance only, given that also T can be expressed in terms of the autocovariance. Indeed, equations (4.6), (4.12) and (5.24) taken together yield

~b(0) . T  2 r c ~ i~(0)l

(8.46)
Let us consider the wind waves interacting with a semiinfinite vertical breakwater, which are extremely nonhomogeneous (think of the very big differences in the wave size between the wavebeaten side and the lee side). The autocovariance, at a fixed point of polar coordinates r,/3, is given by ~b(T)  ~1= }1ai2 (F~ + G~)cos (COg T) , where
(8.47)
ioc 12reS(w,O)[F2(r,/3;co,
0 0
O) + G2(r,/3;co, O)]cos(coT)dOdco,
(8.48)
[~
0
I2~~/(w,O)[F2(r,~;w,O)+ GZ(r,~;w,O)dOdw
0
(8.49)
276
Chapter 8
which enables us to obtain the ~b* at the given point r, 3. Then, the formulae (8.46) for T and (8.48) for ~ ( T ) l e a d to
lO ~ f27r ]0 ~9~ (w, O)[F2(r, fl; w, O) + G 2 (r,/3; w, 0)] dO d w _
T=T~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(8.50)
which gives the mean wave period at point r, 3At this stage, we can evaluate the quotient between the two integrals on the r.h.s, of (8.44), and verify this quotient to range between 0.98 and 1.02 in the area covered by figs. 8.10 and 8.11. Hence, the validity of the simplified equation (8.45).
7*(X, Y, T;xo, Yo)  < rl(xo, Yo, t)rl(Xo + X , yo + Y,t + T) > , (X, Y , z , T;xo, Yo)  < ~(Xo,Yo, t)d~(Xo + X , yo + Y , z , t + T) > ,
(8.51a) (8.51b)
where Xo, Yo is any fixed point. To use this theory it is first necessary to obtain the expressions of ~ and ~b in terms of the spectrum S(a;,0). Of course, the expression of ~ (or ~b) varies according to w h e t h e r the wave field is (8.4ab) or (8.36ab) or (8.39ab) or something else. The logical path to obtain these expressions is the same we have repeatedly traced in this chapter [e.g. to obtain cr2(y) in sect. 8.5.1 where the various steps were illustrated in detail]. For the special p r o b l e m of 7j, (i) substitute in (8.51a) ~7 by its expression, so getting a temporal m e a n of a summation on i and j; (ii) execute the temporal mean with the usual procedure: the mean value of the product of two cosine (or sine) functions with a different frequency is zero; the
, 4
m e a n value of a square cosine (or sine) is + ; (iii) doing so, you obtain an equation like this:
N
(8.52)
where f denotes a function that will be different from one wave field to another; (iv) consider the partial sum of the terms whose frequency a;/is within a small
Analysis of the sea states in the spacetime interval co, a3 + 8co and angle in the form f (X, Y, T; Xo, Yo, ~, O) E  2
i
0i
277
0 < 0 i < 0 + ~0 
(8.53)
(v) integrating the r.h.s, of (8.53) with respect to co over (0, oc) and with respect to 0 over (0,27r), you arrive at
(vi) replace the dimensional variable co with the nondimensional w, and express k in terms of ~(w) through the definition (8.23). A sequence of the same kind leads to the expression of ~b. A few expressions of ~u and ~b are given in the following frames. Such expressions can be used with the formula (8.20) or (8.33) for Y ( w , 0), and the equation (8.24) of #(w). W A V E F I E L D (8.4ab)
~(X,Y,T;xo
Y o )  A g 2a34
P o 0
Lpo
L~0
T~ J
(8.54a)
d +
/
(8.54b)
dO dw. / c o s h [27r~ (w)~p0 ]} sin 27r~ (w) X sin0 + 27r,4 (w) Y cosO  27r w Lpo Lpo Tp
278
27r w
T~
cos 27rW(w)
L~0
dO dw,
X sin0 27rw Tp d sin E 27rS(w) Lpo / cosh 27r~ (w) LTpOl} T I Ecos 2~r~(w) Lpo Yo cos01 cos [2rr~(w) (~po Yo + gpo Y)cosOdOdw. (8.55b)
A2 g 4I I o Y
~p 0
(8.56a) T ) } dO dw, rp
(8.56b)
where
279
N o t e that 5u and ~b of the wave field (8.4ab) in the o p e n sea are i n d e p e n d e n t of Xo and yo, which is correct given that the wave field is h o m o g e n e o u s . Then, the ~u and ~b of the wave field (8.36ab) are i n d e p e n d e n t of Xo, which is again correct, it being the wave field before an infinitely long b r e a k w a t e r parallel to the xaxis.
Conclusive note
As said at the end of chap. 4, the t h e o r y of the sea states in spacetime was due to the contributions of several authors, a m o n g whom: L o n g u e t  H i g g i n s (1957, 1963), Phillips (1967), and B o r g m a n (1969). G o d a et al. (1978) p r o b a b l y were the first to evaluate the diffraction coefficient of the wind waves. T h e a u t h o r (1988) p o i n t e d out the great difference b e t w e e n the wind waves and the periodic waves in what concerns reflection (figs. 8.8 and 8.9). This great difference was then verified t h r o u g h a small scale field e x p e r i m e n t (1993).
References
Boccotti P., 1988 Refraction, reflection and diffraction of irregular gravity waves. Excerpta of the Italian Contribution to the Field of Hydraulic Eng. 3, 4788. Boccotti P., Barbaro G., Fiamma V. et al., 1993 An experiment at sea on the reflection of the wind waves. Ocean Eng. 20, 493507. Borgman L. E., 1969 Ocean wave simulation for engineering design. J. Waterways and Harbors Div. ASCE, 557583. Bretschneider C. L., 1952 Revised wave forecasting relationships. Proc. 2 ~d Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE. Goda Y., Takayama T. and Suzuki Y., 1978 Diffraction diagrams for directional random waves. Proc. 16 'h Conf. Coastal Eng. ASCE, 628650. Hasselmann K., Barnett T. P., Bouws E. et al., 1973 Measurements of wind wave growth and swell decay during the Joint North Sea Wave Project (JONSWAP). Deut. Hydrogr. Zeit. A8, 195. LonguetHiggins M. S., 1957 On the transformation of the continuous spectrum by refraction. Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc. 53, 226229; 1963 The effects of nonlinearities on statistical distributions in the theory of sea waves. J. Fluid Mech. 17, 459480. Mitsuyasu H., Tasai F., Suhara T. et al., 1975 Observation of directional spectrum of ocean waves using a cloverleaf buoy. J. Phys. Oceanogr. 5,750760. Phillips O. M., 1967 The theory of windgenerated waves. Advances in Hydroscience 4, 119149. Sverdrup H. U. and Munk W. H., 1947 Wind sea and swell; theory of relations for forecasting. U.S. Navy Hydrogr. Office, Publ. 601.
280
281
9.1 A sufficient condition for occurrence of a wave of given height very large
9.1.1 Condition (9.1) Let us consider the surface displacement r/(t) at any fixed point Xo = (Xo,Yo) in a random wave field, it being homogeneous like (8.4ab) or nonhomogeneous like (8.36ab) or (8.39ab). From the theory of the sea states, we know that ~7(t) represents a stationary random Gaussian process. Let us analyse the p.d.f, of the surface displacement at any fixed time, given the condition
,7(~o)  T H ,
,7(to + 7" )   T
1 H
(9.1)
where to is an arbitrary time instant, H an arbitrary height and T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance function, which is assumed to be also the first local minimum of this function on the positive domain. 9.1.2 The probability of rl(to + T) given condition (9.1) The p.d.f, of the surface displacement at time to + T (T being any fixed time lag), given condition (9.1), is
p [~ (to + T)  u
1 .]_
(9.2)
1 ~
1 H,~(to + ~ , ) p ~(to)  T
I 1
H,~7(to + T)  u] H 2
1 ]
p rl(to)~H,~7(to+T
,)
282
Chapter 9
(u being the independent variable). The general form of the probability density functions like the ones on the r.h.s, of (9.2) was given in sect. 5.1. Specifically, we have
p . ( t o )  T H1 ,,
1
(to + r*)     1 H, 2
1 (to + T)  ul J
(27r)3/2V~
p
exp { 
~
12]}
(9.3a)
,
1 ,7(to)  T//,,7
'
(9.3b) where Ai] and A are, respectively, the i, j cofactor and the determinant of the covariance matrix of ~?(to), ~l(to + T*), rl(to + T): A i j  i, j cofactor A  determinant of
and Aij and A are, respectively, the i, j cofactor and the determinant of the covariance matrix of rl(to), rl(to + r*):
Aij i, j cofactor
(~b(0) z~  determinant of \ ~ ( T * )
With (9.3a) and (9.3b), equation (9.2) of the conditional p.d.f, becomes p rl(to+T)u
~ H 1 H 2
1 I
2rcA exp   ~
{ 1I A 33u2+
(9.4) 2Ale) ~ H 2
A33
(All
.qt_ A 2 2 _
]}
where we have used the equality A  A33. The argument arg (u) of the exponential function on the r.h.s, of (9.4), that is to
say
arg (u) 
1 ~lH z 2A [A 33u 2 + 2 (A 13  A 23 )
u +
1
+ A ( A n + A 2 2 2 A l z ) ~ H A33
2]
(9.5)
283
2A
Hm) 2 + a r g ( u m )
(9.6)
(9.7)
(The determinant and the i, i cofactors of a covariance matrix are positive, and this is why we have concluded that the function arg(u) has a maximum.) The maximum arg(um) proves to be zero. Hence, the conditional p.d.f, is reduced to the simple form
p ~(to + r )  u ~(to)  T a H , ~ (to + ~ * )
Verify that arg (Urn)  O. You have two alternative ways to do this. First way: from (9.5) and (9.7) obtain a r g ( u m )   2AA33 [(113  A23)2 + (111 + A22  2A12)A33   (All
1
~ A 2 2 
(9.9)
2A12)A] 71
H 2
"
Then, replacing A, A;j and fiij with their own expressions, you will find that the sum within square parentheses on the r.h.s, of this equation is zero. Second way (more elegant)" rewrite (9.4) in the form p [~ (to + T )  u which implies
p ~(to + r )  . ~(to)  5 H, ~(to + )   5 H d . ~ (to)  5//, ~ (to + T* ) 1
27rA
I A27r 3 3A J _ +c exp
which in its turn implies (9.9).
__ )2 [A33(U_Um+arg(um)]duexp[arg(um) ] ~
9.1.3 The mean value and the standard deviation of rl ( to + T) given condition (9.1) Equation (9.8) implies that the mean value of ~ (to + T) (given condition 9.1) is Urn"
~(to+ T)Um.
284
Chapter 9
F(T) 
Equation (9.8) implies also that the standard deviation of r/(to + T), given condition (9.1), is
or(to+T)
A33

~b2 (T) + ~b2 (T  T*)  2~b (T) ~b(T  T*)[~b (T*)/~b (0)] ] g,2 (0)  g,2(T*) from which it follows
v/~b(O),
Ig,(T*)/g,(0)t < 1.
(9.11)
H cr
+ O O ,
provided F (T) is nonzero. In words: given condition (9.1), the quotient between the standard deviation and the mean value of ~7(to + T) approaches zero as H / a ~ ~ . Since T is arbitrary, it follows that, given condition (9.1), the random function ~7(to + T) is asymptotically equal to the deterministic function ~(to + T), as H/cr ~ e~. Of course, this conclusion is valid for finite values of T, given that
F (T) ~ 0 and a
(to + T) + a
as
IT[ ~
oo.
Note, a is the standard deviation of the random process r/(t), while a(to + T) is a conditional standard deviation. Specifically, ~r(to + T) is the standard deviation of r/at time to + T, given the condition (9.1). 9.1.4 P r o o f that (9.1) is a sufficient condition So far we have not used the property of T*, so that T* can be any fixed time lag. Now it is time for the peculiarity of T* to come into the picture. Since ~b(0) and ~ b ( T * )  ~b(T*) are, respectively, the absolute maximum and the absolute minimum of ~b(T), ~ has its absolute maximum (equal to 1 H) at T  0 2
285
!
T*
/
absolute minimum
and its absolute minimum (equal to  1 H ) at T  T*, and hence at T  0 there is a 2 wave crest, and at T = T* there is a wave trough. Since T* is the abscissa of the first local minimum of ~(T) after T = 0, the derivative ) ( T ) is negative on the interval (0, T*)" ~(T) < 0 which implies ~)(r) > 0 on(r*,0), on(0, T*), (9.12)
The inequalities (9.12), (9.13) imply that ~ is strictly decreasing for T in [0, T*]. Therefore, the wave crest at T = 0 and the wave trough at T = T* belong to the same wave, and this wave has a cresttotrough height equal to H [see fig. 9.1]. Hence, the conclusion
as H/cr + oc, condition (9.1) becomes sufficient for the occurrence o f a wave o f given height H.
286
Chapter 9
9.2 A necessary condition for occurrence of a wave of given height very large
9.2.1 A general necessary condition A general necessary condition for occurrence of a wave of given height H is that the surface displacement is ~H, with ~ in (0,1), at a time to and is ( ~  1)H at a later time to + r (to being the instant of the wave crest and to + r the instant of the wave trough). The mathematical form of this general necessary condition is
rl(to)  ~H,
rl(to + r)  ( {  1)H
For focusing the general necessary condition, look at fig. 5.5 [sect. 5.7.3] which shows two waves with a fixed height H and different values of ~ and 7. 9.2.2 The probability ~ (H, r, ~) Let us consider the probability that the surface displacement at an instant to falls between {H and {H + and, at a later instant to + 7, falls between (~  1) H and (~  1) H + dr]2
dr/1
to, H, r, cs being arbitrarily fixed, and dr]l, probability under examination is given by
dr]2 being
2~(H,r,{ ) _
1 2~V~
exp {   1
(9.14)
where l~ij and A are, respectively, the i, j cofactor and the determinant of the covariance matrix of ~7(to) and rl(to + 7)"
l~ij
i, ] cofactor
(~) (0))
(H, T~~)
with
1
2 ~ v / 2 (0) 
~: (~)
exp [  
~f (T, ~)
dr]ld~h,
(9.15)
(0)
(9.16)
287
Check (9.16). First, compare the exponential function on the r.h.s, of (9.14) with the exponential function on the r.h.s, of (9.15), so obtaining
f (~, ~)  _ _
11~ 2 JlJ~x22 ( ~ 
1) 2 q
2~112~(~
1)
~2
you will easily arrive at (9.16). 9.2.3 Analysis of the function f (r, ~)
~(0)
'
2 ~(0)~b(r)
is independent of {, and its absolute minimum on the domain r > 0 occurs at r  T* [given that T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of ~b(r)]. The second term on the r.h.s, of (9.16), that is to say
(o) + ~ (~)
is zero if ~  ~ , and is greater than zero if ~ g= i
/.,.,,
Therefore, the absolute minimum 1 . of the function f (z, ~) for r in (0, co) and ~ in (  c o co) occurs at z ~ T * and ~ ~ 2
9.2.4 Condition (9.1) is necessary The fact that the absolute minimum of f (r, ~) occurs at r T*, ~  ~
1.
2
implies
:~(H,r,~)
~ ,T*,
+0
as H +
c~,
1. In words" as H/cr ~ oc, the for every fixed pair r, ~ with r r , and/or ~ ~ probability that the surface displacement is ~H at an instant to and is (~  1) H at an instant to + r, with r  T* and/or ~ 1 , is negligible with respect to the probability z
288
Chapter 9
that the surface displacement is 1 H at to and is  _1 H at to + T*. Hence, the idea 2 2 1 that a wave with a given height H has necessarily 7   T* and ~  ~, as H/cr + exp. That is
as H/cr ~ oc, condition (9.1) becomes necessary for the occurrence of a wave o f given height H.
Really, we have got a clue that condition (9.1) is necessary for a wave of given height H very large (and this is why we have written hence the idea that rather than hence it follows that). The formal proof calls for some harder work and yields as a corollary the closed solution for the wave height distribution. Such a proof will be dealt with later. Now we go on with the main stream of our reasoning.
9.3 T h e water surface on spacetime, if a w a v e of given height very large occurs at a fixed point
9.3.1 The conditional p.d.f, o f the surface d i s p l a c e m e n t at p o i n t Xo + X a n d
1 (Xo, to)5II,
(Xo, to+ T*
1 H
(9.17)
which is the same as (9.1), only that we write ~7(Xo, to) in place of ~7(to) because now we are dealing with the waves on spacetime. Through the same reasoning we used to arrive at (9.8), we arrive also at
(xo+X, t o + T )  u
27rB
,7(Xo,
(Xo, to+T*)
1 .]
expE
2ff
/~m =
1
B23  B13 H
(9.18) (9.19)
where
B33
2 '
289
and where Bij and B are the i, j cofactor and determinant of the covariance matrix of
Bij i, j
cofactor B  determinant of
~,(o, T*) ~2
~ (X, T  T * )
In this matrix 0 2 and cr2 x are the variances of the surface displacement, respectively, at Xo and at Xo + X, and ~ is the spacetime covariance defined by (8.51a), which here has been written in the compact form
(9.20)
9.3.2 The mean value and the standard deviation o f the surface displacement
(Xo + x , to + T) 
(9.21)
Then (9.18) also implies that the standard deviation of T/(Xo + X, to + T), given condition (9.17), is
c~(xo + X, to + T)  ~/ B33B =
,/or 2 _ 2 ~U2 (X, T) + ~u2 (X, T  T*)  27j (X, T) ~U(X, T  T*)[~U (0, T*)/~ (0, 0)]
x
which yields since
Check (9.21). Equation (9.18) shows that the mean value is Urn.Hence, use the definition (9.19) of Urn,and obtain the expressions of B13, B23, and B33 from the covariance matrix. Note the differences between the three standard deviations in this section: (i) cr is the standard deviation of the random process T/(t) at point Xo, (ii) Crx is the standard deviation of the random process ~7(t) at point Xo + X, (iii) cr(Xo + X, to + T) is the standard deviation of T/at point Xo + X at time to + T, given condition (9.17).
290 9.3.3 A n
Chapter 9
the mean
The mean value (9.21) is rewritten in the form (Xo + X, to + T)  F (X, T)Crx where
1 T) u(X, T T*)
H
O"
(9.23)
F (X, T)  ,~
..v
1 
~ ' ( o , T*)
~u(X, T) and, consequently, F (X, T) do not depend on ~ nor on Crx; they depend only upon the degree of correlation of the random waves at Xo and at xo + X after a time lag T. Specifically, ~u(X, T) takes on values within  1 and 1 for every ~ and ~x. It is 1 if ~/~ at Xo is always equal to ~/~x at Xo + X after a time lag T; it is  1 if ~/~ at Xo is always equal to  ~/~x at Xo + X after a time lag T. Finally 7' (X, T) approaches zero if ~7/~ at Xo at time t is uncorrelated with ~/~x at Xo + X at time t + T. What is the aim of the alternative form (9.23)? Let us consider the case of an extremely nonhomogeneous wave field like that of fig. 9.2, where ~ is much smaller than ~x. Well, (9.22) and (9.23) reveal at once that the free surface displacement at point Xo + X at time to + T is very close to the deterministic value ~ (Xo + X, to + T),
~f//J//////////////////////i///A
XoX
incident
wav~
Fig. 9.2 If an exceptionally high wave occurs at Xo, the surface displacement at Xo + X approaches a well precise deterministic form. This, even if the waves at Xo are much smaller than at Xo + X.
291
if a wave with a height H exceptionally large with respect to a occurs at Xo. This, even if H is very small with respect to the wave heights at Xo + X. 9.3.4 T h e m a i n s t a t e m e n t o f the t h e o r y In conclusion, formula (9.23) for the mean value and inequality (9.22) for the standard deviation imply that cr(Xo + X, to + T) +0 (Xo + x, to + T) as
H
+ oc,
provided F(X, T) is nonzero. Since X and T are arbitrary it follows that, given condition (9.17), the random function r/(Xo + X, to + T) (function of X and T) is asymptotically equal to the deterministic function ~ (Xo + X, to + T), as H/cr , oc. Of course, this is true within a finite area and for a finite span of time, given that ~u(X, T), and consequently F(X, T), approaches zero as X] and/or IT] tend to infinity. The conclusion is: if a wave with a given height H occurs at a fixed point Xo and H is very large with respect to the mean wave height at this point, we can expect the water surface near Xo to be very close to the deterministic f o r m (9.2123). (9.21 and 9.23 being two alternative forms of the same deterministic function.) We shall see in chap. 10 that, if Xo is in the open sea, (9.2123) represent a threedimensional wave group whose centre passes at Xo; if Xo is before a breakwater, (9.2123) represent the collision of two wave groups, one approaching the breakwater and one going back seaward after reflection. In short, (9.2123) show what happens if a very high wave occurs at the fixed point Xo. In what follows we shall use (9.21) since it seems more suitable for the practical applications.
9.4 The velocity potential if a wave of given height very large occurs at a fixed point
Associated with the deterministic configuration (9.21) is a distribution of velocity potential in the water, which to the lowest order in a Stokes' expansion is given by
(Xo + X , z , to + T) 
(9.24)
where X, z and T are the independent variables and ~b is the covariance of the surface displacement and velocity potential of the random wave field (sea state), which is defined by (8.51b) and here has been rewritten in the compact form ~ (X, z, T)  ~ ( X , Y , z , T; Xo,Yo). (9.25)
292
Chapter 9
The surface displacement (9.21) and the velocity potential (9.24) satisfy the linear flow equations. In particular we shall prove that ~ and ~bsatisfy the first linear flow equation under the hypothesis that ~7and ~b satisfy this equation. That is to say we shall prove that provided that ~7g =o (9.27) 1 (O~T) g 0 =o' (9.26)
With the formulae (9.21) and (9.24) for ~ and ~b and the definitions of the covariances 7t and ~b, the equality (9.26) (to be proved) takes on the form H < r/(Xo, t)r/(Xo + X, t + T) >  < r/(Xo, t)r/(Xo + X, t + T  T*) >
< 772 (Xo, t) >  < ~ (Xo, t) ~1(Xo, t ~ T*) >
(9.28)
1 0 g OT
H < ~(Xo, t)$(Xo + X , z , t + T) >  < ~(Xo, t)~b(Xo + X , z , t + < ~2 (Xo9t) ~  ~ " (XT;7)~(X~ ; + TT) > 2
T T*) > l
=0
can be cancelled since it does not depend on T. With the definition of temporal mean, the equality (9.28) becomes lim
.T~
oo ~
T*)] d t 
(9.29a) (9.29b)
1 0 ~b(Xo + X , z , t + T g OT
as a consequence of (9.27). [(9.29ab) simply say that ~ and ~b satisfy the first linear flow equation at point Xo + X at time t + T and at time t + T  T*.] As an exercise, the reader could verify that the deterministic functions ~ and ~b fulfill also the other linear flow equations. It will suffice to use the fact that the random functions ~/and ~ satisfy those linear equations.
293
(9.30)
we aim to prove that the deterministic velocity potential 4~ also fulfils this solid boundary condition. In other words we aim to prove that n. V q S  O
m m
for X  x '  X o
and
zz'.
(9.31)
With the formula (9.24) for qS, the equality (9.31) to be proved becomes n. V f < rl(Xo, t) ~(xo + X,z,t + T) >  < ~7(Xo,t) ~(xo + X,z,t + T  T*) > HI, 0 < r/2 (Xo, t) >  < r/(Xo, t) r/(Xo, t + r*) > 2 / for X  x '  X o and z  z ' .
Given that X and z are the only space variables, this equality is rewritten in the form < ~(Xo, t ) n . V,(Xo + X , z , t + r) >  < ~(Xo, t ) n . Ve(Xo + X , z , t + r  r * ) >  o for X  x '  X o and is proved since and z  z ' ,
n.V~(xo+X,z,t)
0
for X  x '  X o
and z  z ' ,
294
Chapter 9
9.5.2 The theory holds for nearly arbitrary spectra The theory is general not only because the solid boundary is arbitrary, but also because the spectrum is nearly arbitrary. Indeed the only restriction is that the autocovariance must have an absolute minimum which is also the first local minimum after T  0 . We already saw in chap. 4 that this condition is satisfied by the wind waves, and might not be satisfied in special cases of wind waves superimposed on swells of somewhat greater height and very different period. 9.5.3 Consistency with Stokes' theory At first glance one could catch a discrepancy between the assumptions of the quasideterminism theory and those of Stokes' theory. Indeed the quasideterminism theory calls for the wave height H to be very large, and, on the contrary, Stokes' theory calls for the wave height H to be very small. But it takes short time to realize that there is no discrepancy. In Stokes' theory the wave height H must be very small with respect to wavelength L and depth d, while in the quasideterminism theory H must be very large with respect to the standard deviation cr of the surface displacement in the sea state. Hence, the two assumptions are not inconsistent with each other, given that H can well be very small with respect to d and L, even if it is very large with respect to or.
9.6 Formal proof of the necessary condition. Part I: symbols and assumptions
The formal proof of the conclusive statement of sect. 9.2: "condition (9.1) is necessary..." remains to be given. It was not given in sect. 9.2 to make easier the overall view of the theory. We adopt the compact symbols r/, and ~r in place of ~7(t)and ~ ( r ) , and
(x  H/~.
Then, aiming to make the algorithms easier, we assume without loss of generality that both the zeroth and the second moment of the spectrum are equal to 1: m0=~2=l, which implies [~rl<l ~ 0  1, m2=l, ~0 1, if T 0 . (9.32) (9.33a) (9.33b)
The moment m4 will appear in some intermediate steps of the proof, and this could suggest the idea that our analysis does not cover spectra like JONSWAP
295
which has not m 4 (the moments of the J O N S W A P spectrum exist as far as m3); but the matter is not so. Let us see why. Let us fix Wsup such that
I i
and let us define the spectrum E(w)
COsupc o 2 E ( ~ )
dw  1, (9.34) dw
o o~ ~ 2 E o
{  E(w) 0
if if
(M ~ 0.)sup ,
cu >
(.Usup,
which obviously has the moments of any order. What we have done is to cut off a part of the high frequency tail, of negligible energy content. Indeed (9.34) implies
E (w)dw <<
a~sup
E (w)dw.
Passing from a r a n d o m process with E(w) ( = J O N S W A P spectrum) to the r a n d o m process with E (w) ( = J O N S W A P spectrum with a high frequency cutoff) is like passing from the function r/(t)  a c o s ( w t ) +  ~ T 5 cos(nwt) to the function r/(t)  acos(wt). Indeed, the high frequency term
n 1.5 a
as
n + oc,
(9.35)
cos(,, t)
m2,
2
2
2
1
/73,
m2 
2
a2c04 _+_ 1
a2 2 n
F/ a 2 0.34
m4 
1 2
F r o m (9.35) we easily realize that the high frequency term does not alter the crest elevation, nor the trough depth, nor the time interval between the crest and trough,
296
Chapter 9
nor the wave period. It simply ruffles the wave surface with a lot of very small ripples. Therefore the high frequency term can be neglected when the goal of the analysis is concerned with the wave height, or the crest elevation, or the trough depth, or the time lag between crest and trough, or the wave period. This is why in the proof we assume the high frequency cutoff and the existence of m4. Then, given that
I'd4~bdT4< (d4@)TdT4 =0
the existence of
for T 0 ,
m4 implies
9.7 Formal proof of the necessary condition. Part II: core of the proof
9.7.1 T h e d e f i n i t i o n
and the general form of EX (c~, r , ~)
of local maxima of the surface displacement ~7(t) (at the fixed point Xo) whose elevation is between @~ and (~+d~)c~, and which are followed by a local minimum with an elevation between (~1)c~ after a time lag between r and r + d ~ (c~, r, ~ being arbitrarily fixed). Calling ~ the probability that a fixed small interval dt contains such a local maximum of r/(t) (i.e. a local maximum of the given elevation being followed after the fixed time lag by a local minimum of the given elevation), we have E X (c~, T, ~) dc~ d T d~ = ~ Y / d t (9.36) Z where ~ 3 / d t is the number of the local maxima with the given characteristics which occur in a very large time J . Equation (9.36) shows that our expected number per unit time represents a Rice's problem (cf. sect. 5.6). The solution of this problem leads to
E X ( c~, T , ~ )  c~
and
(~l)c~dc~,
10j
oc
297
iol
oo
lulw.
0
(9.37)
and the joint p.d.f, b e f o r e the integral is expressed in the form p[r/0@~,~)00,~)~0,~/~(~1)c~](27r)Zx/~ where 1 exp[ 1 ] ~f(~,~)c~ 2 , (9.38)
(9.39)
and w h e r e M~j and M are respectively the i, j cofactor and d e t e r m i n a n t of the covariance matrix of r/o, ~)o,//~, r/~:
1 0 V~ ~b~
M i j  i, j cofactor
M _ d e t e r m i n a n t of
o
6 45
1
1 0 "
~b~  ~
Check the solution to Rice's problem. To this end, you have to obtain the probability on the r.h.s, of (9.36). This probability is equal to the integral over {(u, w)lu E (  o c , 0) and w c (0, oo)} of the probability that (i) T0 falls between ~ c~ and (~ + d~) c~, (ii)/)0 falls between u and u + du (u < 0), (iii)//0 falls between luldt/2 and luldt/2, (iv) ~= falls between ( 4  1)c~ and ( ~  1)c~ dc~, (v) 4)~ falls between w and w + dw (w > 0), (vi)//~ falls between  w d 7 / 2 and wdr/2. The logic is the same as we developed in sects 5.3 and 5.4. Check also (9.3839) of the joint p.d.f. [hint: use the general form (5.10) of these probability density functions, and note that M44 = Mll]. Finally, check the covariance matrix, reasoning as we did in sect. 5.2.2. 9.7.2 The exact f o r m o f the conditional p.d.f, on the r.h.s, o f (9.37) as c~ ~ oc Let us consider preliminarily the p.d.f, of the second derivative /70, given the condition 7/0 = @~,//0 = 0,//~ = 0, r/~  (~  1) cx. (9.40)
298
Chapter 9
{ [
Css ~
(9.41)
 C15 ~  C45 (~  1) a
u
Cs5
which proceeds from essentially the same steps leading to (9.8). H e r e it will be understood that Cq and C are the i, j cofactor and the determinant of the covariance matrix of ~70,//0,//~, r/~,/)0:
0
1 ~ ~, 0
~, 1
0 "~
% 0
1 ~
1
0
Cq = i, j cofactor
C = determinant of
0 ~ ~p, 1
 ~  ~
"~
~
m4
E q u a t i o n (9.41) implies that the mean value of ~)0 given the condition (9.40) is
00 = K1
(9.42)
C 4 5 ( ~  1)
where
/(1 
C15~
C55
(9.43)
and that the standard deviation is standard deviation of / ) 0  , / C V C55 Equations (9.42) and (9.44) imply that ~)0/oz  KI (7, ~), (standard deviation of/~o/a) ~ 0 so that we write p [(4)o/O~) = u[r/o = ~a,//o = 0,//~ = 0, r/~ = ( ~  1)oz] = 5 [ u  K1 (7,~)] as a ~ oc, (9.45) where, as usual, ~5( u  Uz) represents the delta function at u = Uz. With the same sequence of steps leading to (9.45) we also arrive at p [(4)~/a) = wit/0 = ~a,/0 = 0,/~0, r/~ = ( ~  1)a] = 6 [ w  K2(~,~)] as ce + oc, (9.46) as a ~ c c (9.44)
299
D~5 { 
D45 (~  
1)
Dss
(9.47)
and where
~ ~'~
0 .
~
1
~
0
);
1
m4
~,,)0 
0, ~ oc,
0, v~ 
(~  ~ ) ~ ]
Wm)
9.7.3 The evaluation o f the double integral on the r.h.s, o f (9.37), as a + oc The last equation enables us to evaluate the double integral on the r.h.s, of (9.37). The result is as a+ oc,
joj
oc
lulwp[i)oU,i)~wlrlo@~,ibO, iT~O, r l ~   ( ~  l ) a ] d w d u  0
_J'Ig,(r,~)lg~(~,~)~
if
K~(r,~)<0
and
K2(T,~)>0,
otherwise,
(9.48)
lu wp[i)oU,i)~wl~lo@~,iloO, i l ~  O , q ~  ( ~  l ) a ] d w d u T* and { 1
(9.49)
given that
1 1 +~r* <0, 2 1  ~bv*
(9.50)
300
Chapter 9
Check (9.48). To this end, divide the plane uw into the four quadrants (1st quadrant: u > 0, w > 0; 2 nd quadrant: u > 0, w < 0; 3 rd quadrant: u < 0, w < 0; 4 th quadrant: u < 0, w > 0). The double integral covers the fourth quadrant. The conditional p.d.f, in this integral gathers at point u =/(1 (r, {)a, w = K2 (r, ~)a. Therefore, if this point belongs to the fourth quadrant, the integral is equal to
 IKl(~,
rp~2,/V
\]
exp
and
f ( ~ , ~)~2
(9.51a)
o3
[1
1 ~ 2'
 ~ f ( r , ~)a:
if r T* a n d / o r ~  ~1,
(9.51b)
9.8 Formal proof of the necessary condition. Part III: the central inequality
9.8.1 Theorem The function f (r,~) {r c (0, oo), { c (  c ~ , + ~ ) } given by (9.39) satisfies the inequality f(r,{)>f T, if r T and/or{g:~.
Proof
f (r, {) thought of as a function of {, for any fixed r, has its absolute m i n i m u m at 1 z m: 2 1 . if { 2
f(r,{) >f
(9.53)
301
(9.54)
M l l  M14
1T
2~2~_
2"'2 ~2 + ~ ~
(9.55)
@2r
~2r].
(9.56)
In the Appendix (sect. 9.8.3) we prove the inequality [(1 + ~b~)(1 + ~5~)  ~2] > 0, which together with the equation (9.56) yields M < (M,~  M14)(1  g'T), and this inequality and equation (9.54) taken together give (9.57)
1)
>f(T*,
1)
if r=/=T*,
(9.58)
if r # T * ,

(9.59)
1 ~br*
The two inequalities (9.53) and (9.58) prove the theorem. Note: the p.d.f. (9.38) must approach zero as I~ + oc, which implies that f (r, ~) must approach + oc as 1~1 +oc, or equivalently that Mll + M14 must be greater than zero for every r ( r 0). And that is why we have assumed the one at ~  ~ 1 to be the minimum rather than the maximum of f (r, ~) thought of as function of ~, for any fixed r.
302
Chapter 9
9.8.2
Corollary
The equality (9.51a) and the inequalities (9.51b) and (9.52) imply that 0 as c~ ~ ec, (9.60)
1 for every fixed pair T, ~ such that T T* and/or ~   . 2 In words: EX (a, T, ~) looks like a delta function at T 
T*, ( 
1 ~ , as a + co.
9.8.3
Originally, it was guessed that the inequality (9.57) should hold good for any z 0, whatever the spectrum. Then, the formal proof followed after a few attempts. First it was found that the function on the 1.h.s. of (9.57) is related to the cofactors M22 and M23 by
must be greater than zero, for every u. This function has a minimum (bearing in mind that the cofactors i, i are greater than zero). This minimum is
follows. Since
M33  M22
303
which implies M22 + M23 > 0, M::  M23 > 0, since M22 is greater than zero. The inequality (9.62) completes the proof. (9.62)
E X (c~) o o
(9.63)
9.9.2 The relationship between EXs.w. (c~, 7, ~) a n d E X (c~, r, ~) From the definitions of E X and EXs.w. it follows that
EX, w <_ E x
as 3 ~ ~ .
(We have the second of these relations, because the probability that the same wave condition is fulfilled for large values of the time lag 3 is negligible.) One more relation between EX,.w. and E X proceeds from sect. 9.1. Indeed, a corollary of sect. 9.1 is that, given a local m a x i m u m of elevation c~, 1 and given a 2
Chapter 9
1  a after a time lag T , these are the crest and trough 2 of the same wave, as a , oc. Therefore
as a ~ ~ .
Finally the set of these relations between EX, w and EX, and the limit (9.60) imply
EXsw (a,c, ~)
+ 0 as a + oc,
for every fixed pair T, ~ such that ~ # T* and/or ~ ~ . 9.9.3 Condition (9.1) is necessary The consequence is that the whole contribution to the integral on the r.h.s, of (9.63), apart from a negligible share, proceeds from a neighborhood of point 1 In this neighborhood, EX, w coincides with E X which is given by ~   T ,, ~~. (9.51a):
EXs.w.
eXp
(c~
} ) ( , 1 ) , r * + 5 ~ , ~1  + ~ ~)  K1 ( r*, K~ r , as a ~
a3 (27r)2v / M ( r *)
0(3.
EXs.w.
(o
, T* + 57, ~ + 5~
1 ) ]gl(Z*,2)g2(z*,})
1 (K;~ 2 + K~5(2 )~ ] c~2]exp ~
OZ3
(27r)2v/M(T *)
exp [  ~ f "
1 (T*,1 )
where the formulae for K1, K2, M, f next section. Since K; and K~ are nonzero,
A( })
T*
as a, ec.
(9,64)
EX,.w ~ ,
1) 1) T*,~
305
only if 8r and 8~ have an order smaller than or equal to Og1. Therefore the 1 neighborhood of point r  T*, ~ making the whole contribution (apart from a 2 negligible share) to the integral on the r.h.s, of (9.63) has a radius of order a ~. The conclusion is that a wave of height a + oc has necessarily the two following characteristics (i) time lag between crest and trough equal to T*, apart from a random difference 8r of order a 1" (ii) quotient between the crest elevation and the cresttotrough height equal to
2'
This proves that condition (9.1) is necessary for occurrence of a wave of given height H if the quotient a  H/cr tends to infinity. Also the meaning of necessary condition becomes more clear: as H/cr + co, the wave of given height H fulfils the condition apart from some random difference of a smaller order. 9.9.4 Details o f e q u a t i o n (9.64) The terms on the r.h.s, of (9.64) have the following expressions: K2(T*
(1 ~2,)(1
(9.65a)
M(T*)
'
 ,@2 T*)
1
(9.65b) (9.65C)
~(T, 2)
1  ~r* '
K*  ( (3~27~
__ = T*, ~=~
@r* (1 + @r*)
(9.65d)
(Oq2?~
K~Note also that
(942/=
* T 1 T,~=
8 1 + ~br,
(9.65e)
2;
= T*~~=T
o
which has been used for the second exponential function on the r.h.s, of (9.64). The formulae for K~ T*,
(1)(2)
, K2 T*,
and f
T*,
306
Chapter 9
rewritten for the convenience of the reader, indeed they were already given [cf. (9.50) and (9.59)]. The formula for M(T*) proceeds from (9.55) with A r  r*. Finally, the formulae for K ; and K~ are obtained by differentiating twice f (r, ~). The formula for the second derivative of f (r, ~) with respect to ~ is easily obtained from the definition (9.39) of this function. For obtaining the second derivative with respect to r at
r,
1 i t i s c n v e n i e n t w r k i n g n ( 9 " 5 4 ) f f ( "r, 2 )
The result is
{02f\!
~~T2/, = 1 / 2  M 3
__1
[(]~'IIII~14)M2(MI1MI4)MI~2(]~lII~/II4)M]~/I~N(MllM14)i~2]
The derivatives M, Mll/~/14, /~ and ]~)/11]~/14 are obtained from the formulae for M and Mll  M 1 4 [see sect 98.1] Once these derivatives will be obtained, put r = r*~ and since ~,  0 at r = r * yOU will be able to cancel all the terms containing ~ . Then you will realize that a further big simplification is possible. Specifically, all terms from the underlined part of the formula for 02f/Or2 will cancel out. Moreover, all terms containing the third derivative and/or the fourth derivative of ~, will cancel out, and with such a large number of cancelled terms, the compact form (9.65d) will be achieved.
9.10 Corollary: the closed solution for the wave height distribution
9.10.1
EX
we have
Ex(.) 
(27r)Zv/M ( T ) exp
OO OO
ff
w ) dwdu
as c~ ~ ~ .
Then, using twice the fact that the integral over (  o o , + oc) of exp (  x 2) is equal to v/~, we readily evaluate the double integral. The result is
rcv/M ( T*31(*I(*
where the constants are given by (9.65ae).
307
9.10.2 Solution for the p.d.f, p (a) The probability p ( a ) d a (a, a + da) is that a wave height falls within a fixed small interval
p (a)da = E X (a)da/EX+,
(9.67)
where EX+ is the expected n u m b e r per unit time of zero upcrossings (0+) of the surface displacement r/(t). This expected n u m b e r is the reciprocal of the mean wave period: EX+  1 /  T  1/2re, where the rightmost equality proceeds from (5.24) of T and from the fact that we have taken m0 and m2 as units. With the formula (9.66) for E X (a) and the value of EX+, equation (9.67) yields p(a) 1 + VSr, a exp 4(1~br,) ~/2~r* (1  ~br*) 2(1  ~br*) oc
a s a  + .
(9.68)
9.10.3 Solution for the probability P ( a ) The probability of exceedance P (a) is obtained by integration over (a, oc) of the probability density function. The result is P (a) 1+~5 r exp  4 ( 1  ~ r , ) ( 2 ~ r * (1  ~br*)
2]
asa+~.
(9.69)
Since we have taken m0  1, m2  1, a is the quotient between the wave height and x/~7, and ~r*, ~ * represent the quotients
~r* ~(T*)/m2.
The formula (9.69) was given in advance in sect. 5.7.3. There, it was written in a few alternative ways, and the constant before the exponential function was generically denoted by K. Now we see that K_I+~T* ~ 2 ~ r * (1  ~br*) In sect. 5.7.3 we also said that K can be taken to be 1 for the practical applications. On the contrary, the exact value of K must be applied for a careful test of the formula against the data from numerical simulations.
308
Chapter 9
9.10.4
w h e r e a (P) is the inverse function of P (a). These data were o b t a i n e d from a careful numerical simulation of Gaussian r a n d o m processes. N o w we have got the exact f o r m of ~ (P) as a ~ c~ or P + 0:
as
<9.70)
1.00
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
0.95
0.90
~ 1.20~~
oJp
0.85
0.80
x~
. . . .
10 ~t
103
10 .2
10 a
~r.=0.65
'
1.5a~~ a~p
Fig. 9.3 Check of the closed solution for the probability of the wave height. The data points were obtained by Forristall (1984) through numerical simulations of random Gaussian processes. Abscissa: the probability of exceedance; ordinate: the quotient between the wave height with the given spectrum and the wave height with the infinitely narrow spectrum.
309
(which straightforwardly proceeds from 9.69), and we can check this formula against Forristall's data. The data of ~ ( P ) (see fig. 9.3) were obtained for three distinct shapes of the spectrum. The lines represent the function ~ (P) obtained by means of (9.70) for these spectra. Basing ourselves on the theory, we expect that the convergence of the data points to the theoretical lines occurs as P ~ 0, that is on the left side of the figure; and this is just what happens. But the figure tells us something more. It shows that the convergence of the data points on the asymptotic form (asymptotic in that it is exact as P + 0) is quicker, the narrower the spectrum is: for the very broad rectangular spectrum (~* = 0.41), the convergence occurs for P between 10 .4 and 103; for the somewhat narrower rectangular spectrum (~* = 0.55), the convergence occurs for P between 10 3 and 102; for the characteristic spectrum of the wind waves (~* = 0.65) the convergence occurs even for P = 0.20. In other words, in a Gaussian r a n d o m process with a characteristic spectrum of the sea waves, equation (9.69) proves to be fully effective for P < 0.20 which corresponds to c~ > 3.5. Hence, the first important evidence that the theory of quasideterminism, which is exact as H/c7 + oc, is effective to predict the properties of the realistically high waves.
Conclusive note
310
311
~P (X, Y, T; Xo, Yo)  ~P (X, Y, T  T*; Xo, Yo) H T(O,O,O;xo,Yo) ~P(O,O,T*;xo,Yo) 2 ' q~ (X, Y, z, T; xo  q~ (X, Y, z, T  T*; Xo, yo) H ~(O,O,O;xo,Yo) ~(0,0, T*;xo,Yo) 2
(10.1a)
(lO.lb)
The formulae for the covariances ~u and (b were obtained in chap. 8 for three wave fields" (8.4ab) (open sea), (8.36ab) (interaction with an infinitely long breakwater), (8.39ab) (interaction with a semiinfinite breakwater). The first operation in applying (10.1ab) is to evaluate T*, that is the abscissa of the absolute minimum (which is assumed to be also the first local minimum) of the autocovariance ~ (T) at point Xo, Yo. For the waves in the open sea, ~ (T) is the same for every point of the wave field and can be obtained from the frequency spectrum; and indeed in chap. 4 we have already seen that T* is equal to 0.44 rip for the mean J O N S W A P spectrum [cf. fig. 4.17]. At all events, ~(T) can be easily obtained from the formula for the spacetime covariance with X  Y  0. As an example, for the waves in the open sea, the spacetime covariance is given by (8.54a) from which we obtain.
q;(T)
o o
,Y(w, 0) cos
7:w
Tp
d0dw
,(o)
(o, o, O;xo,yo)
Jo
f J(w,
Jo
O) dO d W
312
Chapter 10
The integrals of the rightmost equality can be evaluated numerically, which yields ~b(T)/~b(O) as a function of T/Tp, and hence we obtain T*/_Tp. The second operation is to obtain the functions ~ and q5 for the special case of interest. In particular for the waves in the open sea g* and ~bare given by (8.54ab), and hence (10.1ab) take on the form
rl(xo+X, yo+Y, to+ T)  H I12~ Y (w, 0) {cos [ARG1 (w, 0)] + ~ 0 0 cos [ARG2 (w, O)]}dO dw/DO,
(a0.Za)
H r ao 1~  2 ~ j (w, O)wIAT1 (w) {sin [ARG1 (w, 0)] + r ~b(Xo+ X, yo + Y,z, to + T) gj%' ~o

(lO.2b)
These equations have been written in a suitable form for PC, thanks to the following definitions:
L~o
L~o
p ~pO ao ao
(w,O)wlATl(w)~/(w).
(10.3a)
cos0 {cos [ARG1 (w, 0)]  cos [ARG2 (w, 0)]} dO dw/DO,
0~
1 27r f~f2~
j j ~9 ~(w, O)wlATl(w)~/(w). o o
sin0 {cos [ARG1 (w, 0)]  cos [ARG2 (w, 0)]} dO dw/DO,
(10.3b)
313
V~ (Xo + X , Yo + Y, z to + T)  O0
'
Oz  g   2 %
2re
{sin [ARG1 (w, 0)]  sin [ARG2 (w, 0)]} dO dw/DO, 027 H 27r II2~ ~ Y ( w , O ) A T 1 (w)/S(w) OYOT  g ~2 ~ Lpo o o (lO.3d) cosO {sin [ARG1 (w, 0)]  sin [ARG2 (w, 0)]} dO dw/DO,
ay(Xo + X , Yo + Y, z, to + T)
ax(xo + X , yo + Y , z , to + T)
O X O T  g ~ 2
027
Lpo o o
27rJI2~
~9 ~' ( w ,
O)AT1
(w)~
(w)
(lO.3e)
Ap(xo + X , yo + Y , z , to + T)   p ~ 00 
(10.3g)
{cos {ARG1 (w, 0)]  cos [ARG2 (w, 0)]} dO dw/DO. We see that r/, vx, G, Vz, 8x, a y , a z , and Ap are given by double integrals with respect to w and 0. These integrals can be numerically evaluated even with some relatively large steps A w, A0. Generally, A w  0.02 and A 0  0.07 prove to be suitable; even if A w  0.05 is large enough at least over the domain IX] < 2Lp, IYI < 2Lp, ITI < 2Tp. As to the limits of integration, we suggest taking Win f   0.5 and Wsup  2.5, which means that the interval of integration is r e d u c e d to 0.5w p, 2.5Wp (this interval being wide enough for the characteristic spectra of the wind waves). Finally, if we apply the directional spreading function (8.16) the interval of integration with respect to 0 usually can be r e d u c e d from the whole circle to
_ E
0in f   0 
I rad,
0su p  
0 + 1 rad.
10.1.2 A f e w suggestions f o r calculations Let us consider the set of w and 0 values used for the numerical integration. It is convenient to associate an integer index with each of these values" e.g. wi.f ~ i  1, Win f 71 / ~ W = ~ i   2 ..., and 0inf =~ j  1, 0inf + A0 =~ j  2, .... Hence, the nondimen
314
Chapter 10
sional spectrum Y (w, 0) and the nondimensional wave number ~ (w) will be stored in memory, respectively, as a matrix and as a vector. As to Y (w, 0), we shall use (8.20) or (8.33). As to,4' (w) it can be obtained by means of (8.24) with d/Lpo as input. Typically, the calculation has to be performed for many pairs X, Y and several values of T. This is why storing in memory J ( w , O ) and ~ ( w ) is useful: the calculation of Y (w, 0) and ~ (w) will be done only once rather than a number of times equal to the product of the number of pairs X, Y by the number of T values. Similarly, one easily recognizes that it is highly convenient to store in memory a vector for sin0 and a vector for cos0. Of course, the more complex algorithms are those of the diffracted waves. Indeed (10.1a) with (8.56a) of ~u (interaction with a semiinfinite breakwater) becomes of the type
~(Xo + X, yo + Y, to + T) H o o
fa(w,O;X,Y;xo, yo)COS ww
(, J~]2~f3 (w,
T~
(,
ww T ) dO dw
where functions fa, f2 and j~ have some rather long expressions Fresnel integrals. The machine time for the denominator is rather there is only one double integral to be evaluated. On the contrary, calls for the evaluation of a number of double integrals equal to the number of points X, Y and the number of times T. Here, a great saving of machine time is achieved on defining:
(10.5a) (10.5b)
~(Xo + X, yo + Y, to + T) H o
7cw
. ec i27r
0 0
dw
(10.6)
If, for each point X, Y, we shall store in memory the vectors Ii(w) and I2(w), we shall avoid repeating the calculation of the same pair f~, f2. As an example, let us imagine we have to compute ~ at 10 instants T, at 6000 points X, Y, with 100 values
315
of w and 30 values of 0 (which is a realistic condition). With (10.4) we should execute 10. 6000. 1 0 0 . 3 0 = 180 million calculations of f~ and f2. While, with the sequence (10.5ab) + (10.6) we should execute 6000. 1 0 0 . 3 0 = 18 million calculations of f~ and f2. Since practically the whole machine time is n e e d e d for the calculations of the functions fl and f2, passing from 180 million to 18 million pairs fl, f2 to be calculated means reducing the machine time to one tenth. Of course, it is useful also to store in m e m o r y the Fresnel integrals. Coming back to the previous example, we have to calculate 18 million pairs f~, f2, each of them calling for 4 Fresnel integrals, which makes 18 million. 4 = 72 million Fresnel integrals to be evaluated. Thus it is convenient to store in m e m o r y SFR(X) (the Fresnel integral with integrand sine) and CFR(X) (the Fresnel integral with integrand cosine) with some fixed increment. As an example if the increment is 0.01 and we have to evaluate SFR(4.932) we shall simply find this value by interpolation, using the two known values of SFR(4.93) and SFR(4.94). Following these suggestions, a calculation like that of the example (10 instants T, 6000 points X, Y) for the more complex case (reflection t diffraction) takes nearly five minutes of Pentium PC time. 10.1.3 Uses of the theory The theory of quasi determinism can be used in place of the periodic wave theory. It is valuable because it predicts what happens on the spacetime just when the highest waves do occur. As an example Xo,Yo could be the location of an offshore structure and H the maximum expected wave height in the lifetime of this structure. Then the theory is able to predict the configuration of the water surface and the particle velocities and accelerations and the pressure fluctuations when this maximum wave height occurs at the structure. But the theory can be also used for some interactive processing. Let us see an example. In chap. 8 we have found an amazing difference between the wind waves and the periodic waves in what concerns reflection. H o w is it possible that nodes and antinodes practically disappear in the wind waves? H e r e we shall use the theory starting from the question "what happens if a wave with an exceptionally large height H should occur at a point Xo, yo at the breakwater?". The answer will bring us into the core of the p h e n o m e n o n . If we shall not realize at once what we are interested to (specifically why nodes and antinodes disappear) we shall choose a new point Xo, yo and get the new answer (hence the interactive processing). Generally, the answers of the theory are simple and enlightening, as we shall verify in the next sections.
316
Chapter 10
2
1
dominant A J
Fig. 10.1 We know that a wave of exceptionally large height H occurs at time to at point Xo, Yo at the centre of the framed area. The pictures show what we can expect to occur before and after to. The nondimensional time lag T/Tp is given on the right side of each picture. The wave of given height H is that at the central position of the group in the third picture (T  0). The arrow points to this wave during its evolution. [Obtained by means of (10.2a).]
317
These are the more conventional ways to use the theory, starting from some theoretical spectrum. Then there is a new way we shall deal with in sects. 10.8910.
318
Chapter 10
wave direction
(a)
13
(b)
C ate
(c)
Fig. 10.2 Replacement of a wave at the envelope centre on deep water. The waves are represented by vertical segments like in fig. 2.17.
(a), (b) and (c) have been taken one period apart from each other. They show wave B being replaced by wave C at the group's centre. At sea, the replacement at the central position of a group can become well evident. This occurs if a high wave like B in the first picture of fig. 10.2a is spilling near the crest. Then this wave leaves the central position (second picture) and it sheds its whitecap. Then the next wave (C) takes the central position and in its turn it starts spilling near the crest. In these cases the whitecap is like a crown passing from one wave to the next one.
10.3 The waves are higher on the time d o m a i n than on the space domain!
Fig. 10.3a shows the wave group on the time domain at point Xo, yo. Fig. 10.3b shows the wave group on the space domain at time T = T*/2, when the envelope centre passes at Xo, Yo. Henceforth we shall call fig. 10.3a "record" since it is the ideal record of the wave group of fig. 10.1 taken by an ideal gauge at point Xo, yo; and we shall call fig. 10.3b "snapshot" since it catches the group at a fixed time instant. Finally, we shall refer to the point Xo, Yo simply as yo given that we deal only with the waves along the yaxis (propagation axis).
319
=H
1
. (b)
o T*/2 7"*
SPACE DOMAIN : 7' T*/2
/\
(~) 0.86H
0..
IY/Lp]
+1 0 1
wave d i r e c t i o n 2
Fig. 10.3 (a) Ideal record of the group of fig. 10.1 taken at point Xo, Yo. (b) Ideal snapshot of the group taken when the envelope centre passes at Xo, Yo. The heights of the waves on the space domain (panel b) are smaller than the heights of the waves on the time domain (panel a). This is a general property due to the fact that each single wave moves along the envelope.
We note at once that the wave heights are smaller in the snapshot than in the record. This is an unexpected feature, and indeed hitherto a cornerstone of the wave theory was: the wave height is the same on the time domain and on the space domain. The new finding can be given a precise explanation as shown below. Wave A is covered by the record for a time interval starting at T~ and ending at T2, while it is caught by the snapshot at a later time (T*/2). This is why A is smaller in the snapshot: both the snapshot and the record show wave A in its decay stage (the wave has left the central position of the group) but the snapshot catches A after it is recorded. Wave C is covered by the record for a time interval starting at T3 and ending at T4, while it is caught by the snapshot at a previous time (T*/2). This is why C is smaller in the snapshot than in the record: both the snapshot and the record show wave C in its development stage (the wave has not yet reached the central position of the group) but the snapshot catches C before it is recorded. Fig. 10.4 should help us to better understand this phenomenon. Indeed it shows a few snapshots of wave A from the time when this wave passes at Yo to the time of fig. 10.3b. Moreover, the figure shows a few snapshots of wave C from the time of fig. 10.3b to the time when it passes at Yo.
320
+1
Chapter 10
0 1 2
I VAVE
fig.10.3b
" +0.5 Tp
IWAVEC I
I Y/Lp [
+1 0 1
wave direction
2
Fig. 10.4 Two "snapshots" of wave A before the time instant of fig. 10.3b, and two "snapshots" of wave C after this time instant. The same difference between space domain and time domain, even if in a more attenuated form, affects wave B at the group centre. Let us observe the snapshot: the wave crest is in front of the envelope centre. Hence shortly before, while passing at Yo, the wave crest was somewhat higher than in the snapshot. Then we see in the snapshot that the trough of wave B is behind the envelope centre. Hence, some time later, when it passes at Yo it will be somewhat deeper than in the snapshot. This p h e n o m e n o n is general: if we photograph a wave group passing at any point and we compare the snapshot to the record taken at this point, we shall find that the waves are smaller in the snapshot than in the record. This is simply because the waves in the group's head are decreasing and the waves in the group's tail are increasing, so that the record catches the decreasing waves before the snapshot and the increasing waves after the snapshot. The result being that both the decreasing waves and the increasing waves are higher in the record than in the snapshot.
10.4 Effects of water depth and of spectrum shape on the wave group
10.4.1 Effects of the water depth We have seen that the cresttotrough heights on the space domain are smaller than on the time domain, as a consequence of the fact that the individual waves move along the envelope. Thus we expect that the greater the difference between the space domain and the time domain (as to the wave height) will be, the larger the relative propagation speed of the individual waves is with respect to the envelope.
321
1 Since this relative speed is ~ c on deep water and a p p r o a c h e s zero on shallow water 2 (cf. sect. 2.9.3), we expect that the difference b e t w e e n time d o m a i n and space d o m a i n will be greater on deep water and will tend to d i s a p p e a r on very shallow water. Fig. 10.5 shows the wave group on the time d o m a i n (GT) and the wave group on the space d o m a i n (GS), on shallow water (d/Lpo = 0.1); for the rest, the input data are the same as in fig. 10.3, and in particular the spectrum is the same. In line with our prediction, we see that the difference b e t w e e n GS and G T is smaller on shallow water (fig. 10.5) than on deep water (fig. 10.3).
Since (i) the difference b e t w e e n GS and G T is smaller on shallow water than on deep water, (ii) u n d e r the same spectrum, G T does not change from deep water to shallow water, it follows that GS changes from deep water to shallow water. Specifically, the wave heights are larger in the GS of shallow water than in the GS of deep water,
(b)
(~)0.95H
:.,
w a v e direction
+1
1
Fig. 10.5 The same as in fig. 10.3 with the only difference that the waves here are on shallow water (d/Lpo  0.1).
322
(a) deep water
1/I //// i
Chapter 10
(b) shallow water
'x x x x
/ i
x\
//
L,0
4r
Fig. 10.6 The wave group on the space domain: (a) on deep water, (b) on shallow water.
and this difference is greater for the waves of the group's tail and of the group's head. The effect being that the GS of shallow water consists of a greater number of waves (or, more precisely, of a greater number of waves high enough to be noticed). The scheme of fig. 10.6 should help to realize this item. The fact that the group on shallow water consists of more waves than on deep water is clearly evident in the three dimensional pictures (fig. 10.7). A comparison between fig. 10.7 (shallow water) and fig. 10.1 (deep water) reveals that the length of the wave crest and the wavelength are both smaller on shallow water. This, naturally, under the same spectrum. 10.4.2 Effects of the spectrum shape The basic properties of the wave group are independent of the spectrum shape; in particular, whichever the spectrum, the wave group has a development stage in which the three dimensional envelope shrinks gradually, and a decay stage in which the envelope stretches. The spectrum shape affects the conformation of the envelope. Specifically, if the frequency spectrum gets narrower, the envelope becomes longer; if the directional spread decreases, the wave crest widens. An idea of the effect of the directional spread on the length of the wave crest is given by fig. 10.8. (To appreciate this effect better, we have resorted to an extremely narrow spreading direction function, with np = 50.) At this stage it should be clear that the directional spread of the spectrum is responsible for the shortcrestedness. We have already realized this item in sect. 8.7 and now we can appraise it from the three dimensional pictures. It remains only to wonder which is the relation between the directional spread of the spectrum and the directions of propagation of the waves. There is a general belief that the directions of propagation of the waves in a sea state are very different from one another. According to this, we should expect that an exceptionally high wave at a fixed point Xo,Yo is due to a collision of wave groups with different directions; similar to that shown in fig. 10.9a. But, as we have seen, the matter is not so, at least for the wind waves. Indeed the quasideterminism
323
2
I
dominant S wavedirection
Fig. 10.7 The same as in fig. 10.1 with the only difference being that the waves here are on shallow water ( d / L p o  0.1). We see that the wavelength is smaller than on deep water, the wave crest is shorter and the wave group consists of a greater n u m b e r of individual waves.
324
Chapter 10
1 ,=201
I ,= 01
Fig. 10.8 With a smaller directional spread, the wave crest gets longer. Here is what happens on passing from n p  20 to n p   50.
theory shows that an exceptionally high wave, most probably, is due to a single wave group travelling in the dominant direction of the spectrum. Indeed, both in fig. 10.1 and in fig. 10.7, we assumed 0  0 and found that the wave group travels along the yaxis.
325
d o m i n a n t wave direction
XO
~Yo
X O
wave crest ~
~Yo
Fig. 10.9 (a) If the directions of the wave groups of a sea state were markedly different from one another, an exceptionally high wave would probably occur because of the collision of two groups. (b) The quasideterminism theory removes this idea, showing that an exceptionally high wave most probably occurs because of the transit of a single wave group which travels in the dominant direction of the spectrum. In the case of fig. 10.11 the d o m i n a n t direction on deep water was o r t h o g o n a l to the c o n t o u r lines, and this is why the direction of advance of the wave groups on the various depths was nearly o r t h o g o n a l to the c o n t o u r lines. If the d o m i n a n t direction on deep water is not o r t h o g o n a l to the c o n t o u r lines, then the direction of the wave groups changes gradually from deep to shallow water (see an example in fig. 10.12). T h e s e changes in direction are well predicted by e q u a t i o n (2.43) with Tp as the wave period.
Fig. 10.10 The directional spread of the spectrum reduces itself from deep water to shallow water because of refraction.
326
Chapter 10
10.6 Explanation of the first big difference between sea waves and periodic waves
10.6.1 Formation o f an exceptionally high wave in the water sheet before a
breakwater
The first big difference between sea waves and periodic waves concerns reflection. You will r e m e m b e r that, starting from about one wavelength from the wall, the variance < 7]2 ( t ) > of the sea waves takes on a constant value equal to half the value at the wall [cf. fig. 8.8]. This implies that the diffraction coefficient Ce takes on the constant value v ~ rather than fluctuating between 0 and 2 like in the periodic waves. As a further consequence, the maximum expected wave height in a time interval At, at any point, starting from about one wavelength from the wall, is 1/x/2 times smaller than at the wall (bearing in mind from sect. 8.8 that the m a x i m u m expected wave height at any fixed point is proportional to the Cd of this point). Whereas, in the periodic waves, the wave height at the antinodes (even very far from the wall) is the same as at the wall. Why such a big a difference between sea waves and periodic waves? The quasideterminism theory enables us to answer this question.
X
~ff~
nant
wave direction
...................
Fig. 10.11 Three "snapshots" of groups at the apex of their development on decreasing depths. (Obtained by means of 10.2a and 8.34.)
327
Let us see first what happens when the m a x i m u m expected wave height occurs at a fixed point Xo,yo of the breakwater; then let us see what happens when the m a x i m u m expected wave height occurs at a fixed point Xo, yo at some distance, say 3Lp, from the breakwater. Clearly, we shall use the formula (lO.la) with the (8.55a) of ~. Fig. 10.13 answers the question "what h a p p e n s if a wave of given exceptionally large height occurs at a point Xo, Yo at the b r e a k w a t e r ? " . This point is at the centre of the f l a m e d part of the b r e a k w a t e r , and the input data are the basic ones [nondimensional spectrum (8.20) with X~  3 and np  20, 0  0, deep water]. We see a wave group that a p p r o a c h e s the b r e a k w a t e r , hits it, is reflected, and goes back seaward. It will have b e e n n o t e d that, while the wave group is a p p r o a c h i n g the wall its envelope gradually shrinks; and, on the contrary, while the wave group goes back seaward, the envelope stretches. This m e a n s that the wave group is at the apex of its d e v e l o p m e n t stage w h e n it arrives at the b r e a k w a t e r . In short, the answer is: if you r e c o r d an exceptionally high wave at the wall, most probably, it is the central wave of a group hitting the b r e a k w a t e r , at the apex of its d e v e l o p m e n t stage. Let us pass to the second question: what happens if a wave of given exceptionally large height occurs at a point Xo, Yo, 3L; before the b r e a k w a t e r ? The answer is given
37
w a v e di~
450
Fig. 10.12 A new series of three "snapshots" of wave groups at the apex of their development. Here the dominant direction on deep water is no longer orthogonal to the coastline.
328
Chapter 10
dominant
z
8
6
4
2
Fig. 10.13 Formation of an exceptionally high wave at a point of an upright breakwater. A wave group at the apex of its development hits the breakwater, is reflected, and goes back seaward. (Obtained by means of 10.1a and 8.55a.) Continued opposite page.
329
330
Chapter 10
Y
1 st
dominant
group
~
nd
6
4
2
Fig. 10.14 Formation of an exceptionally high wave at a point Xo, Yo three wavelengths before a breakwater. Here we see two wave groups, the first one is reflected and goes to collide with the second wave group approaching the breakwater. The exceptionally high wave is produced by the overlapping of the central waves of the two groups. (Obtained by means of 10.1a and 8.55a.) Continued opposite page.
331
4
2 nd
332
Chapter 10
in fig. 10.14 which shows a big novelty: two groups! The first wave group hits the breakwater at time T = 6Tp, is reflected, goes back seaward and collides with the second wave group approaching the breakwater. The central waves of the two groups overlap fully at the fixed point Xo,Yo, yielding the given exceptionally large wave height. This wave height is very large because both wave groups reach the apex of their development when they come into collision (the two envelopes being at the extreme contraction). Hence, the answer is: if you record an exceptionally high wave at a point far from the breakwater, most probably it is the outcome of two wave groups at the apex of their development, which strike each other in full at this point. These two answers of the quasideterminism theory remove the curtain from the reflection phenomenon. 10.6.2 Why the maximum expected wave height at any point far from the
10.6.3 Why nodes and antinodes disappear We have seen how a very high wave occurs at a point (3Lp before the wall) which, according to the classic theory of the periodic waves, should be an antinode. What should we find if the fixed point was the location of a node, say 3.25Lp before the wall? The answer is straightforward: just the same process; that is, two wave groups at the apex of their development come into collision at this point. There is only one minor difference: the time lag between the two groups. Indeed, if the two groups have to strike each other in full 3Lp before the wall, it is necessary that the time lag is 12Tp [cf. fig. 10.15]. While, if the collision has to occur 3.25Lp before the breakwater, the time lag must be of 13Tp. Of course, the probability of two wave groups at 12 Tp from each other is equal to the probability of two wave groups at 13Tp from each other. Consequently, the probability of a given wave height very large at 3Lp from the wall is equal to the probability of the same wave height at 3.25Lp from the wall. Or in other words:
333
/
/
1st wave group
breakwater
,j.xo,Yo
propagation speed of the wave groups lag between the first and the second group
1 /4, 2 = 12Tp
/2
nd
wave group
Fig. 10.15 The trajectories of the two wave groups from fig. 10.14.
the maximum expected wave height at 3Lp from the wall (where an antinode was expected) is equal to the maximum expected wave height at 3.25Lp from the wall (where a node was expected). Nodes and antinodes would survive also in the wind waves, were the wave groups longer than they actually are. If the spectrum was infinitely narrow, the wave group would consist of a sequence of many waves of nearly the same height. In this case, at the point Yo =  3 L p , the waves of the same group would overlap in phase
, @.."T"..
@ @i
@ @ @ @ @
(a)
(b)
Fig. 10.16 (a) A typical sea wave group. (b) How the wave groups would be if the spectra were much narrower than they are. The waves of group (a) overlap one another up to one wavelength from the breakwater. The waves of group (b) overlap one another up to many wavelengths from the breakwater.
334
Chapter 10
coherence: wave crest @ returning seaward + wave crest (2) approaching the wall, wave crest @ + wave crest @ and so on [see fig. 10.16b]. Hence, the wave height at this point would be 2H as at the wall. Conversely, at point Yo = 3.25Lp, the waves of the same group would overlap in opposition: crest of wave returning seaward + trough of wave approaching the wall, and viceversa. Hence, the wave height at this point would be zero: node. Thus, we realize that the disappearance of nodes and antinodes is due to the small length of the wave groups. And, given that the length of a wave group depends only on the frequency spectrum, we realize also why nodes and antinodes disappear in the longcrested waves as well. 10.6.4 Why a few pseudonodes and pseudoantinodes remain near the
breakwater
A halfwavelength before the wall, the crest of the group's central wave approaching the wall overlaps in phase coherence the crest of the group's head wave returning seaward; and the crest of the group's central wave returning seaward overlaps in phase coherence the crest of the group's rear wave approaching the wall. Of course, the largest wave height at this point (a halfwavelength from the wall) will be smaller than the largest wave height at the wall. Indeed, the largest wave height at the wall will be twice the height of the group's central wave, while the largest wave height at a distance of a halfwavelength from the wall will be the sum of the heights of the group's central wave and of the preceding (or following) wave. In conclusion, the maximum wave height at the distance o f ~1 Lp from the wall will be rather large because two waves of the same group necessarily overlap one another in phase coherence at this point. But this maximum wave height will also be necessarily smaller than the maximum wave height at the wall. Hence, the origin of the pseudoantinode. 10.6.5 Why the pseudoantinode becomes more evident on shallow water Take a snapshot of the wave group on deep water, e.g. that of fig. 10.3b. Measure the elevations of the central wave crest and of the preceding wave crest. Then add up these two elevations. Doing so, you will obtain the elevation of the wave crest at the first pseudoantinode if the wave group hits a breakwater. Indeed, the crest elevation a halfwavelength before the wall is equal to the sum of the elevations of two consecutive crests taken at the same time. Now do likewise with fig. 10.5b that shows the wave group, under the same spectrum, on shallow water. You will obtain a greater crest elevation because the wave heights are greater in fig. 10.5b than in fig. 10.3b (the reason for this, having been explained in sect. 10.4). Hence, we realize why, under the same spectrum, the maximum expected wave height at a halfwavelength from the wall is greater on shallow water than on deep water.
335
10.6.6 W h y the p s e u d o  a n t i n o d e b e c o m e s less e v i d e n t in the o b l i q u e reflection Fig. 10.17 shows what happens if a wave of given exceptionally large height occurs at a point Xo, yo on the breakwater, in a case of inclined wave attack: the dominant direction of the spectrum of the incident waves makes a 25 angle with the wallorthogonal. We see that the wave group travels in the dominant direction of the spectrum, hits the wall (at the apex of its development stage), is subjected to specular reflection and returns seaward. In this manner the centre of the wave crest approaching the breakwater does not collide with the centre of the wave crest returning seaward [see the scheme of fig. 10.18]. Hence, we realize why the maximum expected wave height at the first pseudoantinode is smaller than in the orthogonal reflection, as we found on comparing fig. 8.9b with fig. 8.8.
10.7 Explanation of the second big difference between sea waves and periodic waves
The second big difference between sea waves and periodic waves concerns diffraction. The Cd (and consequently the maximum expected wave height) is surprisingly high in the dark area [see figs. 8.10 and 8.11]. On the other hand the Cd in the more sheltered area is practically the same as the Cd of the periodic waves. What is the reason for this? To answer this question let us see what happens when the maximum expected wave height in a very large time interval occurs at a point Xo, Yo of the more sheltered area; and what happens when the maximum expected wave height occurs at a point Xo,yo of the less sheltered area (dark area).
More sheltered area As to the point of the more sheltered area, we fix xo = l.5 Lp, yo = O+,
where 0+ means in contact with the lee wall. Fig. 10.19 shows what happens when the maximum expected wave height in a very large time interval occurs at this point: a wave group strikes the breakwater's tip in full; thus one half of the wave crest hits the wall and one half enters the sheltered area and produces the exceptionally large wave height at the fixed point. The configuration of the water surface has been obtained by means of (10.1a) with (8.56a) of ~u. Since the Cd of the fixed point is 0.2, while the Cd of the wave beaten wall is 2, the height H of fig. 10.19 has been taken ten times smaller than the height H of fig. 10.13. (Always, bear in mind that the maximum expected wave height at a point is proportional to the Cd of this point.)
336
Chapter 10
dominant
8
~6
4
2
Fig. 10.17 Formation of an exceptionally high wave at a point Xo, Yo of a breakwater, if the dominant direction is not wallorthogonal. A wave group at the apex of its development hits the breakwater and is subjected to specular reflection. (Obtained by means of 10.1a and 8.55a.) Continued opposite page.
337
~0
338
Chapter 10
breakwater incident wave
cres~,,,~ _ ~
~//
/A\
\\~
~~/reflected
wave crest
/// \\\ /'~encentreof the reflected ~ ' ~  ~ . wave crest "~__. __~J___ .... \_~___ _~_~_~. ......... ~, ........... / 7....................... /~~ \~antinode
//
I/ // / / / \\ \\ \\
I/
I \\ the right wing of the incident wave crest overlaps the right wing of the reflected wave crest
Fig. 10.18 If the waves are inclined with respect to the wallorthogonal, the incident and reflected waves of a group do not strike each other in full.
Less sheltered area As to the point of the less sheltered area, we fix xoLp, yo4Lp.
Note that the Cd of the wind waves at this point is 0.49 while the Cd of the periodic waves is 0.30. Fig. 10.20 answers the question "what happens when the maximum expected wave height occurs at this point?" Here we see a great novelty: for the first time the quasideterminism theory shows a wave group that does not travel in the dominant direction of the spectrum; the dominant direction is wallorthogonal, while the group attacks from the left side. To explain this novelty, here is a short story. Two researchers, Paul and John analyse a wave record taken at the fixed point Xo, yo of the less sheltered area, and find an exceptionally high wave in this record. Then, John reasons as follows: "The dominant direction of the spectrum is wallorthogonal, which means: the highest wave groups, most probably, approach the barrier orthogonally. Hence, our exceptionally high wave, most probably, has been produced by a wave group which stroke the breakwater's tip in full." He takes the pencil and sketches the trajectory of this wave group (see fig. 10.21a). Paul objects to this reasoning: "Suppose it was a wave group, so to say, anomalous, that is a group whose direction did not coincide with the dominant direction of the spectrum. With this t r a j e c t o r y  (see fig. 10.21b)  the wave group would have nearly struck our point in full; indeed, it would have only grazed the tip of the breakwater with its right wing." Paul concludes: "It's true, the percentage of groups like mine which do not travel in the dominant direction is very small; but it's also true that even with a small deviation from the dominant direction, the wave height considerably grows at our point Xo, yo. Weighing the pros and cons, I am inclined to believe that the group's trajectory was as in my sketch."
339
It is not easy to decide who's right, but the quasideterminism theory takes a definite position: Paul is right! H a d the recorded wave height H been infinitely great with respect to the r.m.s, surface displacement at the fixed point Xo, yo, the probability that the matter is as in Paul's opinion would even approach 1. This is, of course, if the point Xo, Yo belongs to the less sheltered area. Indeed, John's interpretation holds good if the exceptionally high wave is recorded at a point Xo, Yo of the more sheltered area (the case of fig. 10.19). And, in fact, even a very inclined wave group would be far from striking a point in the more sheltered area in full. The conclusion is evident: the heights of the wind waves in the less sheltered area (the dark area) are unexpectedly great, because a few wave groups are able to nearly strike this area in full. We realize also that the long crested waves, having no directional spread, have some much smaller heights in the dark area.
Let us fix two points @ and @ at sea. The distance between these two points should be within about ten wavelengths (this condition guarantees that in the open sea the two points belong to a h o m o g e n e o u s wave field, cf. sect. 8.1). We allow the wave field to be generally n o n  h o m o g e n e o u s because of reflection, diffraction and/ or refraction. Let us take a record of a sea state, simultaneously, at point @ and @. Then we wonder "what happens at point @ if a wave of given very large height H should occur at point @?". We can use the time series data to answer this question. Let us see how. Equation (10.1a) is rewritten in the form
~ (Xo + X , yo + Y, to + T) < rl(xo,Yo, t)rl(Xo + X , yo + Y , t + T) >  < ~l(Xo,Yo,t)rl(Xo + X , yo + Y , t + T  T*) > H 2 < T]2(Xo, Yo, t) >  < rl(Xo, Yo, t)rl(Xo, Yo, t + T*) >
(10.7) Therefore, if we take point @ as Xo,Yo and point @ as Xo + X , Yo + Y [see fig. 10.22], we have ~2 (to + T)  < T]I (t)r]2 (t + T) >  < TIe(t)r]2 (t + T  T*) > H 2 (10.8) < T]I (t) >  < T]I (t)T]I (t + T*) > 2 ' where
'/]1 (t)  r/(t) recorded at @,
~2 ( t )  r/(t) recorded at @.
340 ~ ~o~
Chapter 10
8
6
4
Fig. 10.19 Formation of an exceptionally high wave at a point Xo, yo on the lee wall, one and a half wavelengths from the tip. The exceptionally high wave (we mean that it is exceptionally high for the point where it occurs) is pointed by an arrow. It is due to a wave group striking the breakwater's tip in full. (Obtained by means of 10.1a and 8.56a.)
341
exceptionally large height H occurs at @ (to being the instant when the crest of this wave passes at point @). T* in (10.8) is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance ~b(T) at point @" ~b(r)  < ~/1 (t)f/l (t + T) > . Of course, the calculation can be done for an arbitrarily large number of points, and the expected surface displacement at point j if a wave of given very large height H occurs at point i is given by
fla.(to + T ) 
< f]~ (t) >  < f]i (t) f]i (tAt r * ) >
H 2 '
Let us take sampling interval Atsamp of 0.1s, wave record of 300s, two wave gauges like in fig. 10.22. Then, as an example, let us consider the average < r/~ (t)r/2 (t + T) > for T  0.5s [this average being necessary for obtaining ~2 by means of (10.8)]. It is given by 1 [~/~(0) r/2 (0.5s) + r/~ (0.1s) r/2 (0.6s) + ... + r/1 (299.5s) ~/2(300 s)] 2996 (the sampled data are 3001 from each of the two gauges, and the products rh r/2 available for this average are 2996). Note, it is not necessary to specify the location of @ relative to @, in that X and Y do not appear in the formula for ~2(to + T). 10.8.2 Technique
o f calculation with time series data o f the surface displacement and o f the fluctuating pressure head
H 2
This gives the expected velocity potential if a wave of given very large height H occurs at point Xo, Yo. Hence, we can obtain the expected fluctuating pressure head by means of
~lph(Xo + X, yo + Y,Z, to + T) 
where rlph is the fluctuating pressure head of the random sea waves.
342
Chapter 10
14
12
10
8
Fig. 10.20 Formation of an exceptionally high wave at a point Xo, Yo of the area where the diffraction coefficients proved to be surprisingly great (dark area of fig. 8.10). Here is a novelty: the wave group travels in a direction slightly different from the dominant wave direction (the dominant wave direction is wallorthogonal while the group attacks from the left). Continued
opposite page.
343
6
 ~U ~~
344
Chapter 10
XO ' Y o
/
I
I
t/breakwater
' , , ,
I
iI
breakwater
,
,
I ,~
!
!
!
, !
Fig. 10.21 Paul and John notice an exceptionally high wave in a record taken at point Xo, Yo behind the breakwater. They give two different explanations of how this wave occurred. Who's right?
L e t us imagine we r e c o r d the surface d i s p l a c e m e n t at a point Q and the fluctuating pressure h e a d at a point Q b e n e a t h the w a t e r surface. Then, equation (10.9) enables us to obtain the expected fluctuating pressure h e a d at Q if a wave of given very large height H occurs at Q). Indeed, taking G as Xo, Yo and Q as Xo + X , Yo + Y , z we have
~ (to + :r) 
"xo +X , Yo+ Y
?
f Xo,Yo
X
Fig. 10.22 Graphic aid for the step from (10.7) to (10.8).
345
w h e r e 711 (t) is the time series data of the surface displacement at @, and 7]ph2(t) is
the time series data of the fluctuating pressure head at @, and T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance of ~/1 (t). Note, equation (10.9) requires that the point Xo + X, yo + Y, z is permanently beneath the water surface. Indeed, to obtain this equation, we have assumed that the Bernoulli equation holds at this point at every time instant. 10.8.3 T e c h n i q u e o f c a l c u l a t i o n with the time series data o f the f l u c t u a t i n g pressure head If a pressure head wave with a given exceptionally large height H occurs at a fixed point Xo, Yo, Zo, at a time to, we can expect that the pressure head waves and the surface waves near Xo, Yo, Zo are given, respectively, by ~Tph(Xo + X , yo + Y, Zo + Z, to + T) 
"~Tph(Xo+X, yo+ Y, Z o + Z , t +
 < ~Tph(Xo, Yo, Zo, t)rlph (Xo, Yo, Zo, t + T*) >], O(Xo + X , yo + Y, to + T) H [< ~Tph(Xo yo, Zo, t)~7(xo+X, yo+ Y , t + T) >  < ~Tph(Xo,Yo, Zo t). 2
,yo +
>l/r<
l i t _
zo,,
,,,,,i
> +
(lO.lOb)
 < ~Tph(Xo, Yo, Zo, t)rlph (Xo, Yo, Zo, t + T*) > / ,
_1
where T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance ~(T) of the pressure head waves at Xo, Yo, Zo: ~ ( T)  < ~lph(Xo, Yo, Zo, t) ~Tph(Xo, Yo, Zo, t + T) >. The use of the theory with only the time series data of the fluctuating pressure head is very convenient. Indeed the pressure transducers have a very high precision and low cost, and work well also in sea water. As to the employment of (10.10a), let us suppose to record the fluctuating pressure head at two fixed points (~ and Q beneath the water surface. Then the expected fluctuating pressure head at Q, if a pressure head wave of given exceptionally large height H occurs at (~, is given by ~h: (to + T) =
< ~
( t ) ~ (t + T) >  < ~ ( t ) ~ (t + T  T*) > < ~12ph~ (t) >  < Zlphl (t)~Tph~(t + T*) >
H 2 '
346
Chapter 10
where 7]phl (t) and T]ph2(t) are the time series data of the fluctuating pressure head obtained at the two fixed points, and T* is the abscissa of the absolute m i n i m u m of the autocovariance of the pressure head waves at @:
~)(T) ~ < T]phl (t)?lphl (t q T) >.
Check equations (10.10ab). First, consider the pressure head waves at the fixed point Xo, yo, Zo, and prove that the condition
~
(to)
'
T]ph(to+ T ,) :
becomes necessary and sufficient for the occurrence of a pressure head wave of given height H, as H/cr ~ oe (here cr being the r.m.s, fluctuating pressure head at the fixed point). To this end, bear in mind that rlph(t) at any fixed point represents a stationary Gaussian random process, and retrace all the steps of sects. 9.1 and 9.2. Then, to achieve (10.10a) retrace step by step also sect. 9.3. The only difference being that now you have to consider the conditional p.d.f, of the fluctuating pressure head at point Xo + X , yo + Y, Zo + Z, at time to + T, given the condition
~ph(Xo, Yo, Zo, to) H 2' ~Tph(Xo, Yo, Zo, to + T*) H 2 .
(10.11)
Use the same procedure also to achieve (10.10b). This time, consider the conditional p.d.f, of the surface displacement at point Xo + X , yo + Y, at time to + T, given the condition (10.11). All these conditional p.d.f.s, take on the general form (9.18), and each time you have only to specify the proper entries of the covariance matrix. 10.8.4 T h e u s e o f the t h e o r y w i t h t i m e series d a t a is v e r y e a s y e v e n w i t h a v e r y complex solid boundary.t In the writer's opinion the most remarkable property of the quasideterminism theory is that it holds whatever the configuration of the solid b o u n d a r y (of course, provided the flow is frictionless). This property is fully appreciated when working with the time series data of ~7 and/or rlph. It does not matter at all how complex the solid b o u n d a r y is, and, more important, it does not matter at all whether the p r o b l e m of the interaction between waves and this solid b o u n d a r y has been solved. We have simply to obtain a few timeseries data of r / a n d / o r rlph and use equations (10.7), or (10.9) or (10.10ab), with these time series, to predict what happens if a wave of given exceptionally large height occurs at a given point. The answers, as we shall see in the next two sections, are surprisingly clear and enable us to u n d e r s t a n d the essential features of the wave m o t i o n u n d e r examination.
347
2
1
6.4 ~ n a
dominant
wave direction
..
Fig. 10.23 Question: what happens if an exceptionally high wave should be recorded at pile @? Answer: the three dimensional picture.
348
Chapter 10
have already seen in fig. 10.1, with the only difference being that the wave attack is from the right side and there is an array of nine piles. These nine piles of small sections were actually put at sea for the experiment RC 1990, and their plan is shown in the lowest part of fig. 10.23. Let us observe the first picture of this figure: wave B occupies the central position of the group and is at piles @@. After a wave period Tp, the envelope centre falls b e t w e e n wave B and wave A: wave B has become smaller because it has left the central position of the group, and wave A has become higher because it is going to occupy the central position of the group. One more period Tp (third picture) and wave A passes the array @@ and occupies the central position of the group. R e p l a c e m e n t of wave A with wave B at the envelope centre is evident also in fig. 10.24 which shows the records made by an ideal array of gauges at the piles. We see that wave B occupies the central position of the group at points @ and @, while at points @@ wave A has replaced B. The centre of the wave crest passes at
FROM A THEORETICAL SPECTRUM
I I I
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
(D
T[s] 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4
Fig. 10.24 Same question as in fig. 10.23: what happens .... ? Answer: the time series at the piles.
349
point @ and at point @, and from @ to @, wave B b e c o m e s smaller and longer, and, conversely, wave A b e c o m e s higher and shorter. Fig. 10.25, like fig. 10.24, shows w h a t h a p p e n s at points @@ if a wave of given exceptionally large height should occur at point @. Fig. 10.24 was o b t a i n e d by m e a n s of (10.2a) with a theoretical spectrum, while fig. 10.25 was o b t a i n e d by m e a n s of (10.7) with the time series data of a sea state. T h e likeness of the two figures is really amazing! W h a t we see in fig. 10.25 is something like the genetic code of the sea state. It contains the i n f o r m a t i o n on w h a t h a p p e n s if an exceptionally high wave should occur at a given point (specifically, at point @). T h e genetic code can be extracted from the time series data of a gauge array with the technique described in sect. 10.8.1, and it is not necessary that these time series include some very high
GENETIC CODE
I I 1 I I I I I I I I
6
5
4
3
2
1
V / ~ ,
//'"',~_~
rtsl
4
6
5
4
3
2
1
Fig. 10.25 Same question as in fig. 10.23: what happens .... ? Answer: once again the time series at the piles. The previous figure (fig. 10.24) was obtained by means of (10.2a) with the theoretical spectrum (8.20), while this figure was obtained by means of (10.7) from the time series data of the experiment RC 1990!! Specifically, the time series data of a sea state (540s, 250 individual waves) were used to obtain the averages on the r.h.s, of equation (10.7).
350
wave record at p o i"n t
Chapter 10
wave record
wave direction
w a v e crest
Fig. 10.26 The dominant direction is estimated with precision from the relative phase of the points @@. Indeed the group's central crest (in the genetic code) is perfectly straight.
wave. In this, the genetic code of the sea state is like the genetic code of the h u m a n beings. I n d e e d , for obtaining the genetic code of a h u m a n being, even a few cells are enough; and, similarly, for obtaining the genetic code of a sea state, even a few scores of consecutive waves are enough. It will have b e e n n o t e d that the genetic code (fig. 10.25) fully confirms r e p l a c e m e n t of wave A with wave B at the central position of the group, and the related big transformations: wave B b e c o m i n g smaller and longer, and wave A growing and shrinking. This confirmation comes out in the whole set of records of the e x p e r i m e n t R C 1990. Of course the input data for the theoretical group of figs. 10.23 and 10.24 are those of the sea state from which we extracted the genetic code of fig. 10.25: d  3 m, Tp  2.20 s, 0  20 . As to angle 0, it can be evaluated very carefully from the relative phases of wave A at the points @(2) [cf. the scheme of fig. 10.26].
Comparison between records of exceptionally high waves and the genetic code
In the following pages a few records of very high waves are shown t o g e t h e r with the genetic codes of their sea states. T h e s e are the highest waves of four small scale
351
field e x p e r i m e n t s in the n a t u r a l l a b o r a t o r y of R e g g i o Calabria. In each of these e x p e r i m e n t s a gauge array was used to r e c o r d the surface d i s p l a c e m e n t and/or the fluctuating p r e s s u r e h e a d at s o m e fixed points. By the highest wave of an experiment we m e a n the wave with the highest q u o t i e n t H/cr in the whole set of zero upcrossing waves and zero downcrossing waves o b t a i n e d by the gauge array. A c c o r d i n g to the zero upcrossing definition, which was i n t r o d u c e d in sect. 4.1 and h i t h e r t o followed, an individual wave is the se
t i
B A
, , ,
l,
T[slJ
2
t[s]
6
4
2
290
292
294
296
298
i
. r      ~ v A
. . . . . .
! i I 
r[sl
2
6
4
2
290
292
294
296
298
Fig. 10.27 (a) Genetic code: what happens at points @@ in the open sea if a zero downcrossing wave of given exceptionally large height should occur at point @. (b) What really occurred when a very high wave was recorded at point @; it was the wave with the greatest H/c~ of the experiment RC 1990.
352
__>
__+>
[...,,
r[s]
, , t , t , I , L , I +, I , I , l , I , I
6
4
2
D
4
12m
10
+
12
14
,,
@@@@
. . . . .
7.5m
016"
~~
6m
Fig. 10.28 (a) Genetic code: what happens at the various points before the breakwater if a wave of given exceptionally large height should occur at point O (we mean that the wave is exceptionally high with respect to the mean wave height at this point). See panel (b) of this figure on the next page.
353
A ./__. B y~E
, 474
I 476
I 478
[ 480
I 482
1 484
f 486
I 488
I 490
I 492
I 494
t[s]
, 496
Fig. 10.28 (b) What really occurred when a very high wave was recorded at point @; it was the wave with the largest H/~ of the experiment RC 1991. See panel (a) of this figure on the previous
page.
quence of a crest and the following definition an individual wave consists the quasideterminism theory holds only that the r.h.s, of (10.1ab) must
trough; according to the zero downcrossing of a trough and the following crest. Of course, also with the zero downcrossing definition; be multiplied by  1 .
Experiment R C 1990
The highest wave was recorded at point @. It was a zero downcrossing wave with H = 9.6o. Fig. 10.27b shows the record made by the gauge array, and the arrow points to the highest wave. Then fig. 10.27a shows what happens if a wave of given very large height H should occur at point @. It is the genetic code of the sea state where the exceptionally high wave was recorded.
354
Chapter 10
Let us examine this code. The relative phases at the traverse of points @@ reveal that 0 was about 10 . Hence, if the centre of the wave crest passed at point @ it had to pass very close to point @. The replacement of wave A with wave B at the c e n t r a l position of the g r o u p is well evident; note the characteristic big transformations from point @ to @ along the path of the crest centre. The actual waves (record) are more irregular, but the essential features are the same as in the genetic code. There were nine piles, each with an ultrasonic probe above the water surface and a pressure transducer beneath the water surface. The sampling device was able to receive 16 signals simultaneously, and hence two gauges had to be disconnected (the disconnected gauges were those of pile 6). The figure shows only the pressure head waves, the surface waves can be seen in the paper of Boccotti et al. (1993).
Experiment R C 1991 A small upright b r e a k w a t e r of 1 2 m was built and an array of pressure transducers was assembled before this b r e a k w a t e r [see the sketch in the lowest part of fig. 10.28a]. These gauges were 0.60m below the m e a n water level and were p e r m a n e n t l y b e n e a t h the water surface. The gauges far from the wall were supported by horizontal beams of small section. The highest wave was a zero upcrossing with H = 9.6a. It was recorded at point @, in the course of record 51. Fig. 10.28a shows what happens at the various points if a wave of given exceptionally large height H should occur at point @ (of course, we m e a n exceptionally large for this point). Fig. 10.28b shows what really happened. The likeness is evident. A few comments for a d e e p e r understanding. The time histories of the genetic code are consistent with one a n o t h e r in depicting the following scene: a wave group approaching the wall from the left strikes point @ in full, then the centre of the wave crest hits the wall (nearly in the centre), and returns seaward passing close to point @. [The angle between the direction of wave advance and the wallorthogonal can be estimated with precision from the relative phases at the traverse of gauges @@, and it proves to be of 16.] Note that wave A at the wall has left the central position of the group and wave B is going to replace it. As a consequence, the wall is b e a t e n by a sequence of two big waves of nearly the same height.
The double peak of the high wave crest at the wall is very characteristic of the pressure head waves and is associated with the occurrence of a high vertical water jet. These water jets damaged the wire connections, and this is why a few time series are lacking. In the case under examination, the genetic code does not foresee that the exceptionally high wave is due to the collision of two groups, although the point Xo, yo is far from the wall. The reason is that, if the centres of two groups collided at location @, the centre of the first group would hit just the left tip of the breakwater and hence only a part of the group's energy would be reflected. The genetic code foresees that the exceptionally high wave is due to the collision of two groups only if we take Xo, Yo to the right of point @, for example if we take @ as Xo, yo. Indeed if the centre of the reflected group has to pass at this point, it must hit the wall at a certain distance from the tips.
355
_(!)@
~_~_~j~f",
~/ ~
.;':~
i
r[s]
@
. . . . . . w
~
~ ,
284
~~~_..__.__~_
_.
I
286
L
288
t
290
"x...
292
t[sl
~94'
~;6 ~ ~;8
300
Fig. 10.29 (a) Genetic code: what happens if a wave of given exceptionally large height should pass through the platform. (b) What really occurred when a very high wave was recorded amid the columns" it was the wave with the largest H/o of the experiment RC 1992.
356
Chapter 10
Experiment R C 1992
The field laboratory of this experiment is shown in fig. 11.1. The structure is the 1:50 scale model of a gravity offshore platform. The highest wave which passed through the platform was a zero upcrossing with a height somewhat greater than 8a. Fig. 10.29a [obtained by means of (10.7) and (10.9) from the time series data] shows what happens if a wave of given exceptionally large height should pass at point @ amid the columns. Specifically, it shows the expected surface displacement at point @ and the expected pressure fluctuations at four points of the structure. The differences
/kPl2 Pl
P2,
 P4,
Ap34 = P3
give an idea of the fluctuating horizontal force. All time histories here are given in a normalized form. This means that a surface wave of, say, 8 times the r.m.s, surface displacement has the same height (in the figure) as a pressure head wave of 8 times the r.m.s, fluctuating pressure head. Here too, the records taken in the highest wave are close to the expected time histories of the genetic code.
Experiment R C 1993
The field laboratory of this experiment is shown in fig. 11.6. The structure is the 1:30 scale model of a submerged tunnel. The highest wave was a zero downcrossing of the forceprocess Fy (t). The height was H = 10aF, [H here has the dimensions of a force and CrF, is the standard deviation of the forceprocess Fy (t)]. Fig. 10.30a shows the expected time histories of the surface displacement above the tunnel, the pressure fluctuations at a few points, and the forces Fy (t) and Fz (t), when a wave of the process Fy (t) with a given exceptionally large height occurs. According to the genetic code the exceptionally large troughtocrest displacement of the horizontal force should occur because a wave group passes over the tunnel when a wave (B) is going to replace the preceding one (A) at the central position. As usual, panel (b) of the figure shows what really occurred when the exceptionally high wave was recorded; and once again the likeness with the prediction of the genetic code is apparent. Note, the crest of the second highest surface wave is deformed because of a flaw of the ultrasonic probe (this probe does not work well with spilling or almost breaking waves). Nevertheless, the configuration of the wave group is well evident in the record of the pressure transducer @ beneath the water surface at the same location of the ultrasonic probe. According to the theory of the sea states, the force on a solid body represents a stationary Gaussian random process of time (provided the flow is frictionless). Therefore the quasideterminism theory can be applied also to the force on the tunnel. In particular, if a wave of given exceptionally large troughtocrest height of the process Fy(t) (horizontal force) occurs at an instant to (we mean that to is the instant of the positive peak), the expected time
357
'"
. ~ \ ~//~
...
6
4
2

/'~
,B
~"
_1
502
504
5;6
5;8
510
512
=4>
%: ,I
I I [
cross section
Fig. 10.30 (a) Genetic code: what happens if an exceptionally high wave of Fy(t) [horizontal force on the cylinder] should occur. (b) What really occurred when a very high wave of Fv(t) was recorded.
358
Chapter 10
histories of the surface displacement at any point x, y, the pressure fluctuation at any point x, y, z, and the horizontal and vertical forces are given, respectively, by
(x, y, to + T) A p (x, y, z, to T) < Fy(t)~l(x, y, t + T) >  < Fy(t)~(x, y, t + T < FZ(t) >  < Fy(t) Fy(t T*) > y < F~(t) >  < Fy(t)Fy(t + T*) > < Fy(t)Fy(t + T) >  < Fy(t)Fy(t + T  T*) > H < FZ(t) >  < Fy(t)Fy(t + T*) > 2 Y < Fy(t)Fz(t + T) >  < Fy(t)Fz(t + T  T*) > H < F2(t) >  < Fy(t)Fy(t + T*) > 2 ' y T*) > H 2 ' T*) > H 2 '
Fy(to + T ) 
Fz(to + T ) 
where T* is the abscissa of the absolute minimum of the autocovariance of Fy(t). 10.10.2 T h e g e n e t i c c o d e is l i n e a r Of course, the very high waves, besides a residual random nature, also exhibit some nonlinearity effects. A clear example is the double peak of the pressure head waves of fig. 10.28b, which is associated with the occurrence of a vertical water jet at the breakwater. The genetic code is unable to foresee these nonlinearity effects. Indeed, it proves to be strictly linear even if it is obtained from the time series data. In other words, the genetic code is able to foresee the essential features of sea waves: the existence of the threedimensional groups, the characteristic mechanics of these groups in the open sea, and the way of interaction of these groups with any solid body. But, it is not able to foresee the local deformations of the individual waves due to nonlinearity. 10.10.3 C o n c l u s i o n Comparing fig. 10.27b with 10.27a, 10.28b with 10.28a, 10.29b with 10.29a, and 10.30b with 10.30a, we see the chaotic (windgenerated) waves approach a deterministic archetype. This archetype is contained in the very chaos of the sea storm, and it can be extracted and seen. The highest waves tend to this archetype but, necessarily, retain something of the chaos where they are born. The quasideterminism theory says that the deterministic archetype would stand out from the chaos only with an infinitely high energy concentration ( H / c r ~ e~). The deterministic archetype is like Michelangelo's prisoner searching the extreme energy to free himself from the marble's grasp.
C o n c l u s i v e n o t e o f c h a p t e r s 9 and I 0
The quasideterminism theory was introduced by the author in a series of papers from 1981 to 1989. The theory for the time domain, including the formula for the wave height probability, was given in the early papers of 1981, 1982. The experimental verification off the beach of Reggio Calabria was made by the author and his students.
359
Fig. 10.31 Michelangelo Buonarroti: Prisoner named Atlantis; Florence, Academy's gallery (see mention in sect. 10.10.3). Photo by Alinari, Florence.
References
Boccotti P., 1981 On the highest waves in a stationary Gaussian process. Atti Acc. Ligure di Scienze e Lettere 38, 271302; 1982 On the highest sea waves. Monograph Inst. of Hydraulics, University of Genoa, 1161; 1982 On ocean waves with high crests. Meccanica 17, 1619; 1983 Some new results on statistical properties of wind waves. Appl. Ocean Res. 5, 134; 1984 Sea waves and quasideterminism of rare events in random processes. Atti Acc. Naz. Lincei Rendiconti 76, 119127; 1988 Refraction, reflection and diffraction of irregular gravity waves. Excerpta of the Italian Contribution to the Field of Hydraulic Eng. 3, 4789; 1989 On mechanics of irregular gravity waves. Atti Acc. Naz. Lincei Memorie 19, 110170; 1989 Quasideterminism of sea wave groups. Meccanica 24, 314; 1997 A general theory of threedimensional wave groups. Ocean Eng. 24, 265300; Boccotti P., Barbaro G. and Mannino L., 1993 A field experiment on the mechanics of irregular gravity waves. J. Fluid Mech. 252, 173186. Forristall G. Z., 1984 The distribution of measured and simulated heights as a function of spectra shape. J. Geophys. Res. 89, 1054710552.
360
361
1st g~ platf
d=2.5m
I l
Fig. 11.1 The field laboratory for the experiment RC 1992. Foreground: the 1:50 scale model (with some minor variations) of the support structure of a gravity offshore platform. The prototype was described by Dawson (1983), and the 1:120 scale model was tested in a wave flume by Garrison et al. (1974).
362
Chapter 11
Thanks to the two arrays of gauges it was possible to compare the force on the platform with the force on an equivalent water mass (i.e. one with the same volume and shape of the solid body). Specifically, it was possible to evaluate the horizontal diffraction coefficient
(11.1)
where Fo (t) is the horizontal force on the solid body and Fo (t) is the horizontal force on the equivalent water mass, which is called the FroudeKrylov force. The Cdo of the columns was close to 2, while the Cdo of the base consisting of nineteen cylinders ranged between 1.2 and 1.6 according to the wave characteristics. The waves were the 1:50 scale model (same Froude number) of ocean waves with an H~ ranging from 10 m to 20 m. The analysis of a few hundred records showed that the amplitudes of the pressure fluctuations, at corresponding points of the platform and of the equivalent water mass, were nearly equivalent to each other. In particular the standard deviation
V/<
(t) >
of the pressure fluctuation at point Q was nearly coincident with the standard deviation
363
Fig. 11.2 (a) Pressure head waves at points @ and @ of the columns, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @ amid the columns. (b) Pressure head waves at points @ and @ of the equivalent water volume, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @.
o.6os,
(b) equivalent w a t e r m a s s
Fig. 11.3 (a) Pressure head waves at points @ and @ of the platform's base if a wave of given very large height passes at point @ amid the columns. (b) Pressure head waves at points @ and @ of the equivalent water volume, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @.
364
Chapter 11
there is a phase angle which is twice as large as the phase angle between the first half and the second half of the equivalent water mass (the first half being the wave beaten one, and the second half being the sheltered one). The larger phase angle implies a larger pressure difference between the first half and the second half of the solid body. Note that if we redouble the phase angle between two points (where the pressure fluctuations have the same amplitude and frequency) we increase the pressure difference between these two points only if the original phase angle is smaller than 120 . This condition is usually satisfied by pairs of points like @ and @ at the platform's base, at least in the design sea states which have some very large wavelengths. Even more so, the aforesaid condition (the original phase angle being smaller than 120 ) is satisfied by pairs of points like @ and @ which are only one column's diameter apart. To summarize, the horizontal forces on the base and on the columns of the platform are larger than the horizontal forces on the equivalent water masses, essentially because the propagation speed of the pressure head waves drops at the base and columns. The drop in the propagation speed is the same at the column and at the base. However, the percentage rise of the horizontal force due to this drop is greater for the column, since it has a smaller diameter. In sect. 11.4.3 we shall give the relation between the force enhancement and the drop in the propagation speed.
Let us examine the variations of the flow field from a water vertical cylinder to a solid cylinder of the same diameter. To this end, let us assume ideal flow and small wave amplitude, which means neglecting the shear stress and the flux of m o m e n t u m with respect to the local inertia. Let us consider the water vertical cylinder. The pressure fluctuation at point A of the cylinder's boundary [see fig. 11.4] has some zero upcrossings at the instants tA~ and tA3. At these instants, the control volume before point A has a positive local inertia
Iyp
J Ovy dW. w Ot
If the water cylinder is replaced with a solid cylinder of the same diameter, the absolute value of Iy reduces itself (Ovy/__Otbecomes zero at point A of the solid boundary); while the pressure at point A [the left end of the control volume] does not change, provided the length Ay of the control volume is such that the local perturbation gets negligible at point A . Therefore, the pressure at point A at instants tA1 and tA3 grows if the water cylinder is replaced with the solid cylinder. Through the same reasoning we conclude the pressure at point A, at time tA2 of the zero downcrossing, is reduced if the ideal water cylinder is replaced with the solid cylinder (this time the local inertia Iy is negative and its absolute value gets smaller because of the presence of the solid body).
365
Ij
IJ
A
AT POINT w.c.
A ,43
AT POINT
SC
()
tB1
t~
t~
Fig. 11.4 The time taken by the pressure head wave to cover the distance from A to B at the vertical water cylinder is tB2  tA2. If A and B belong to the solid cylinder, the time gets longer: tB2 tA2 + 2At. This_can be proved by applying the linear m o m e n t u m equation to the small control volumes A  A and B  B .
Because of the rise at times tA1 and tA3 and the fall at time tA2 , the pressure fluctuation at point A is subjected to a negative time shift (  A t ) if the ideal water cylinder is replaced with the solid cylinder. Similarly, through the analysis of the control volume before point B, we can conclude that replacing the ideal water cylinder with the solid cylinder we would find a positive time shift (+At) of the pressure fluctuation at point B. The conclusion, as we see from fig. 11.4, is that (i) in the case of the ideal water cylinder the pressure head wave takes the time tB2   tA2 to pass from point A to point B; (ii) in the case of the solid cylinder, the pressure head wave takes the time (t~2  tA2) + 2 A t to cover the same distance from point A to point B. 11.2.2 Is this a g o o d p h y s i c a l interpretation? The reasoning we have done for a vertical cylinder is true also for a horizontal cylinder. It suffices to think of the circle of fig. 11.4 as the cross section of a horizontal cylinder. Hence, if the reasoning is correct, we should expect to find the propagation speed of the pressure head waves also dropping at a submerged horizontal cylinder.
366
Chapter 11
In addition, if we extend the analysis done for the two horizontal control volumes A  A and BB to the vertical control volumes CC and DD (see fig. 11.5), we arrive at a new interesting prediction on what should occur on a horizontal cylinder. Let us see it here below. When a wave crest passes over the horizontal cylinder, the local inertia Iz of the control volume above C is negative. If the horizontal water cylinder is replaced with a solid cylinder of the same diameter, the absolute value of Iz decreases, while the pressure at the upper limit C of the control volume does not change, provided the height Az is large enough to make the local perturbation negligible at point C. Therefore, the pressure at point C, at time tl when the wave crest is over this point, must grow if the water cylinder is replaced with the solid cylinder. Then the analysis of the control volume below point D shows that the pressure is reduced at this point of the solid cylinder at time tl. Finally, applying the linear m o m e n t u m equation to the two control volumes at time t2 of the wave trough, we can conclude that replacement of the ideal water cylinder with the solid cylinder causes pressure decrease at C and pressure increase at D. Hence, from the ideal water cylinder to the solid cylinder, the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation grows at point C of the upper halfcylinder and decreases at point D of the lower halfcylinder.
C
Az
I I I
!jc
I
Z
AT P O I N T (+)
SoCo
C ()
WoC.
AT POINT
t2
t2
CY"
"s.c.
(+)/
we.
Fig. 11.5 Passing from an ideal water cylinder to a solid cylinder (here we are dealing with a horizontal cylinder), the amplitude of the pressure head waves grows at the upper halfcylinder and decreases at the lowerhalf. This is proved by applying the linear momentum equation to the small control volumes CC and DD. The method of reasoning is the same that we followed to explain the drop in the propagation speed.
367
These predictions were made after having observed the characteristic drop in the propagation speed at the base and at the columns of the offshore platform. Thus, a new experiment (RC 1993) was designed to verify (i) whether or not the propagation speed of the pressure head waves also drops at the horizontal cylinder; (ii) whether or not the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation grows at the upper halfcylinder and decreases at the lower halfcylinder.
Horizontal forces
For analysing the wave forces on a horizontal cylinder, the model of a submerged tunnel was assembled. The scale of the model was 1:30 since the wave heights in the natural laboratory of Reggio Calabria are roughly 1:30 of the wave heights of heavy Mediterranean storms. Two models were studied: first, the model of a big tunnel
2 nd gauge array: equivalent water cylinder 1~t gauge array: solid cylinder _. i ! wave direction
d=3m
........
1 _ , +_
......
crosssection of the cylinder
@.
radiant
crown
.@
Fig. 11.6 The field laboratory for the experiment RC 1993. (The ultrasonic probe to the left of probe @ was needed only for a careful estimate of the wave direction.)
368
Chapter 11
containing a railway and highway (prototype diameter: 27 m), then the model of a relatively small tunnel containing only the railway (prototype diameter: 13.5 m). The model of the larger tunnel is shown in fig. 11.6. Once again there were two arrays of gauges with the same configuration. The first one was at the model of the tunnel and the second one at a certain distance from it, where the waves were not disturbed. The aim, of course, was to compare the force on the cylinder with the FroudeKrylov force, that is to say, with the force on an ideal water cylinder equivalent to the solid cylinder (which we shall call simply the ideal water cylinder). Fig. l l.7a shows the expected fluctuations of the pressure head on the boundary of the solid cylinder if a wave of given very large height passes at point @ above this solid cylinder. Similarly, fig. l l.7b shows the expected fluctuations of the pressure head on the boundary of the ideal cylinder, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @ above this cylinder. The calculations were made by means of (10.9) from the time series data of the surface displacement and the fluctuating pressure head of one of the records. We can see the full confirmation of the drop in the propagation speed of the pressure head waves. Specifically, we see that the pressure head wave takes 0.43 s to pass from point @ to point @ of the solid cylinder; while it takes 0.22 s (half the time!) to cover the same distance from point @ to point @ in the undisturbed wave field. Then we see that the time taken to pass from point @ to point @ of the solid cylinder is 1.7 times greater than the time taken to cover the same distance from point @ to point of the undisturbed wave field. Finally, the time taken to pass from point @ to point @ of the solid cylinder is 2.3 times greater than the time taken to cover the same distance from point @ to point @ of the undisturbed wave field. Thus, on average, the propagation speed at the solid cylinder is twice as small as in the undisturbed wave field. It is a general property: 380 out of 380 records with the big tunnel showed a drop of about 50% in the propagation speed. This, despite the large variety of wave conditions, which, at the prototype level, ranged from sea states with an Hs of 6 m to sea states with an Hs of 14 m. There was a similar response in the 200 records made with the small tunnel (the one for the railway only), the only difference being that the reduction factor of the propagation speed was somewhat smaller: 1.75 against 2. The fact that the propagation speed at the big tunnel was twice as small as in the undisturbed wave field implied that the horizontal force on this tunnel was nearly twice the corresponding FroudeKrylov force (Cdo between 1.8 and 2.0). The Cao of the small tunnel was nearly a 10% smaller because of the smaller drop in the propagation speed. 11.3.2 Vertical forces The vectors in fig. 11.8 show the amplitudes of the pressure fluctuations at the gauge locations of the solid cylinder and of the ideal water cylinder, with the following conventions:
369
J
 ~
~
I 0.43s
~
t
Fig. 11.7 (a) Pressure head waves at points of the horizontal cylinder, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @. (b) Pressure head waves at points of the equivalent water cylinder, if a wave of given very large height passes at point @.
370
Chapter 11
(i) the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation at point @ (the lowest point of the ideal cylinder) is taken as the reference amplitude (amplitude as_); (ii) the norm of the vector represents the absolute value of the difference
Ai~ ai a5
1,
where ai is the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation at the ith point; (iii) if the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation at a point is greater than the reference amplitude (that is if Ai> 0), the vector at this point is inward normal to the cylinder. Clearly, by amplitude of the pressure fluctuation we mean the root mean square pressure fluctuation. The term amplitude is simply used because it seems more effective. The graph of fig. 11.8 should communicate at once the outcome of the experiment. Indeed we see that, from the ideal cylinder to the solid cylinder, the amplitude of the pressure fluctuations grows at the upper halfcylinder, and on the contrary decreases at the lower halfcylinder, what confirms the prediction of sect. 11.2.2. The graph of fig. 11.8 can be thought of as the pressure distribution under a wave crest (naturally, we mean the wave pressure). The ratio between the pressure force on the solid cylinder and the pressure force on the ideal cylinder is equal to 1.75. This ratio proves to be nearly coincident with the vertical diffraction coefficient
Cd,, =
V/<
(t) >
(11.2)
where F~ (t) is the vertical wave force per unit length on the solid cylinder, and F~ (t) is the vertical wave force per unit length on the ideal cylinder. The graph of fig. 11.8 is the average of 380 graphs like this, one for each record of the experiment with the big tunnel. The same diagram with only a slightly smaller quotient between the two pressure forces (1.65 against 1.75) emerged also from the 200 records with the small tunnel. In conclusion, the vertical wave force on the solid cylinder is greater than the vertical wave force on the ideal water cylinder because the amplitude of the pressure fluctuations grows at the upper halfcylinder and decreases at the lower halfcylinder. Thus, the cause of the increase of the force F, from the ideal water cylinder to the solid cylinder is completely different from the cause of the increase of the force Fo: the increase of the vertical force depends on a variation of the amplitude of the pressure fluctuations, whereas the increase of the horizontal force depends on a variation of the phase of these fluctuations. However, the increase of the vertical force shows a high correlation with the increase of the horizontal force: Cd~ proves to be systematically nearly a 10% smaller than Cdo.
371
[Izd/R= 3[
.59
.79
.47
.47
.59
.64
/
/  WATER \ \]L~__ .19 .25     '  " ~ CYLINDER (~_ .09
.16 ___~(~ ,. i , ~,~,,,~, ~ _ _ _ _ .22
.13
.13
Fv=1.75 F~
.18 t
Fig. 11.8 Amplitude of the pressure head waves on the solid cylinder and on the equivalent water cylinder. The amplitude of the pressure head waves at point Q has been taken as the reference amplitude. Reading example: .79 at Q means that the amplitude of the pressure head waves at Q is a 79% greater than at @; .18 at @ means that the amplitude of the pressure head waves at Q is a 18% smaller than at G. 11.3.3
Using the theory of the sea states, one can verify that Fo and F~, as well as Fo and F~, are stationary Gaussian processes. Now, the processes of the horizontal forces Fo and Fo are really very similar to the Gaussian processes, and in particular they are statistically symmetrical with respect to the mean value. On the other hand the processes F, and F~ exhibit a characteristic nonlinearity effect. Fig. 11.9 should be effective to illustrate these ideas. Panel (a) of fig. 11.9 gives the probability that a peak of the process Fo (t) exceeds a threshold which is /3 times the standard deviation of this process, i.e. the probability that the peak exceeds the threshold
372
Chapter 11
e
positive peaks + negative peaks
(a) ~ ( t )
?. eq.(5.30) 10"3
e
positive peaks + negative peaks
(b) Fo(t)
,:
lO2
eq.(5.30)
101
101
./~=
(c) Fv(t)
P
Ca') Fv Ct )
positive peaks + negative peaks eq.(5.30)
,(5.30)
10"3
101
10.1
Fig. 11.9 Probability of exceedance of the positive peaks (crests) and of the negative peaks (troughs) of: (a) the horizontal force on the equivalent water cylinder; (b) the horizontal force on the solid cylinder; (c) the vertical wave force on the equivalent water cylinder; (d) the vertical wave force on the solid cylinder.
A n a l y s i s of t h e w a v e f o r c e s o n o f f s h o r e s t r u c t u r e s
373
of the forces
11.4.1 The basic property H o w does the force on the horizontal cylinder fluctuate, if a wave of given very large height H passes over the cylinder? The answer is given by fig. 11.10 both for the solid cylinder and for the equivalent water cylinder. The force on the equivalent water cylinder has been multiplied by the diffraction coefficient (C do or Cd~ according to whether the force is horizontal or vertical). A n d again how does the horizontal force on the offshore platform fluctuate if a wave of given very large height H passes through the platform? The answer is given by fig. 11.11 both for the solid platform and for the equivalent water mass. Here too the force on the equivalent water mass has been multiplied by the diffraction coefficient Cdo. The two figures show what we have called the genetic code; specifically, it is the genetic code of the forces, which was obtained with the quasideterminism theory and the time series data of the experiments RC 1992 and R C 1993. The figures show that Fo (t) is very close to the product Cdo Fo (t), and similarly
oo
T/'/'p
Fig. 11.10 Time history of the force if a wave of given very large height passes over the horizontal cylinder: continuous line = wave force on the solid cylinder; points  diffraction coefficient (which is a constant) wave force on the equivalent water cylinder. [Obtained by averaging the "genetic codes" of the records of experiment RC 1993.]
374
Chapter 11
(a) Force on platform's base
:
k0
(b) Force on platform's column
T/Tp
TITp
Fig. 11.11 Time history of the force if a wave of given very large height passes through the offshore gravity platform: continuous line = force on the solid body; points = diffraction coefficient (which is a constant) x force on the equivalent water volume. [Obtained by averaging the "genetic codes" of the records of experiment RC 1992.] F~ (t) is very close to the product Cd~ F~ (t). It is a crucial property that we express
SO:
maximum expected wave: [ Fo (t)  Cdo Fo (t), ( F~ (t)  Cd~ F~ (t). In words: we can obtain the time dependent force exerted by the group of the maximum expected wave by multiplying the force on the equivalent water mass by a constant factor (Cdo for the horizontal force and Cd~ for the vertical force). The genetic code of figs. 11.1011 does not include the nonlinearity effects. Now, we have seen in sect. 11.3.3 these effects to be negligible for the horizontal forceprocesses Fo (t) and Fo (t) and to be not negligible for the vertical forceprocesses F~(t) and F~(t). However, the incidence of the nonlinearity effects (i.e. the percentage enhancement of the positive peaks and the compensating lowering of the negative peaks) is nearly equivalent for the process F~ (t) and for the process F~(t), as we can realize on comparing fig. 11.9c with fig. 11.9d. Thus the computation of Fu (t) as product of F~ (t) by the constant Cd~ proves to be effective even if we take into account the nonlinearity effects. Conclusion: the evaluation of the forces on offshore structures (we mean the class of structures hitherto considered) gets much simpler, and the diffraction coefficients Cdo and Cd~ take on an importance much greater than one may think from their definitions (11.1) and (11.2).
375
11.4.2 Analytical and numerical solutions The analytical solution to the linear wave diffraction problem for a vertical circular cylinder extending from the seabed and piercing the free surface was obtained by Mac Carny and Fuchs (1954). The analytical solution for the interaction between periodic waves and a horizontal submerged cylinder (being understood it is a circular cylinder) was obtained by Ursell (1950) and completed by Ogilvie (1963). The analytical solution for the interaction between periodic waves and a group of truncated circular cylinders was developed by Linton and Evans (1990) and Kim (1992) (case of bottom mounted cylinders), and by Yilmaz (1998) (case of cylinders piercing the free surface). A numerical method for the interaction between periodic waves and solid objects of arbitrary shape is well established and is due to the work of Garrison and Rao (1971) and Garrison and Chow (1972). In this numerical method the velocity potential of the scattered waves is given as the result of a distribution of point wave sources over the surface of the solid object. The sum of this velocity potential and the velocity potential of the incident waves must satisfy the boundary condition at a number of points of the solid surface. The aforesaid analytical solutions, and especially the one for the horizontal cylinder, are given by rather complex formulae. The numerical solutions in their turn call for much work on computer. For an illustration of these solutions, fig. 11.12 shows the diffraction coefficient for the circular cylinder extending from the seabed and piercing the free surface. Line @ is the classic solution of Mc Camy and Fuchs (1954) for the periodic waves, and line @ is the solution based on the theory of the sea states with the usual characteristic spectrum of the wind waves. [According to the theory of the sea states
Cao
riodic waves
R/L , R/Lp
0 I I I I
I
0.05
0.1
0.15
Fig. 11.12 The diffraction coefficient of the vertical circular cylinder extending from the seabed and piercing the free surface. Line @ was contributed by F. Arena.
376
Chapter 11
the horizontal force represents a stationary Gaussian process whose standard deviation can be obtained from the directional spectrum of the incident waves. The way of reasoning is the one followed in sect. 8.6 to get the diffraction coefficients of the wind waves behind a vertical breakwater.] The term diffraction coefficient refers to waves and wave forces. The first meaning is: quotient between the standard deviation of the surface displacement of waves interacting with some solid body and the standard deviation of the incident waves. The second meaning is: quotient between the standard deviation of the force on a solid body and the standard deviation of the FroudeKrylov force. 11.4.3
In the foregoing sections we have suggested an approach different from the classic one. The classic approach consists in obtaining the solution, preferably the analytical solution, for the diffraction coefficient of bodies with more and more complex forms. Here, we have tried to understand what is the cause of the diffraction coefficient, looking at the results of two field experiments in the light of the quasideterminism theory. Thus we have realized something valid regardless of the body shape, whether it is the column or the big base of the gravity platform, or the submerged tunnel. First, we have understood that Cdo is essentially due to a drop in the propagation speed of the pressure head wave at the isolated offshore body. Then we have understood the reason for this drop, which in its turn has enabled us to understand that Cd~ is the effect of a variation in amplitude of the pressure fluctuations. Here below, basing ourselves o n these ideas, we suggest a general criterion for estimating the diffraction coefficient. (a)
F~
/ \ [ ~ water cylinde \ /
J l
~,
I
At
(0)
IF,'
I
T,
~'"
t
Y;
Fo"
I
e At T
Fig. 11.13 Wave forces on the left (wave beaten) halfcylinder, and on the right (sheltered) halfcylinder. (a) Ideal water cylinder. (b) Solid cylinder.
377
We refer to the sketch of fig. 11.13a showing the crosssection of a vertical water cylinder. Let us think of the cylinder as being subjected to two horizontal wave forces F ' (t) and F ' o' (t) , the first one acting on the left halfcylinder (the wave b e a t e n half), and the second one acting on the right halfcylinder (the sheltered half). These forces have the same amplitude and frequency, and a phase angle e__: Fo (t)  F sin (w t + e_/2), Fo'(t)  F sin (co t  _e/2). H e r e e__is the average phase angle b e t w e e n opposite points like P' and P " [see fig. 11.14]. Naturally, we m e a n the weighted average with respect to cos/3, that is
J
0
'~/Z(2R c o s 8
27r/L)cos8 d 8
[~/2 cos8 d~
,/0
where the term within the parenthesis on the r.h.s, is the phase angle b e t w e e n point P' and point P". The result is 7le kR. (11.3) 2 The solid cylinder [see fig. 11.13b] is subjected to two wave forces having the same amplitude F and frequency w and a phase angle e greater than _e: Fo (t)  F sin (co t + e/2), Fo' (t)  F sin (co t  e/2).
wave direction
m v
el
_/
~ p"
I \
\ /
\ /
water cylinder
378 We have
Chapter 11
e~e_,
(11.4)
where ~ is the reduction factor (greater than 1) of the propagation speed of the pressure head waves at the solid cylinder, which we shall call s p e e d d r o p factor. Thus, the pressure forces on the water cylinder and on the solid cylinder are respectively
Fo (t)  Ff (t)  Fo' (t)  F [sin(cot + /2)  sin(cot  /2)], Fo (t)  Fo (t)  Fo' (t)  F [sin (cot + e/2)  sin (co t  e/2)],
[sin (cot + e/2)  sin (cot ~/2)]2 > < [sin (cot + /2)  sin (cot  /2)]2 >
Isin(c/2)l Isin(c/2)l
sin
(11.5)
The same reasoning is true also for a horizontal cylinder, with only one difference. In the case of the vertical cylinder, Fo is parallel to the propagation axis. In the case of a horizontal cylinder, Fo is orthogonal to the cylinder axis, and hence is affected by the wave direction. The larger the angle 0 that the wave direction makes with the orthogonal to the cylinder axis, the smaller is the relative phase . Specifically we have
and accordingly
c 
71"
k R cosO,
sin
Cdo =
4 . os0)
for the horizontal cylinder. (11.6)
Isin kRcos0)
Analysis of the wave forces on offshore structures 11.4.4 Hints for the use of the general formula
379
The formula of the foregoing section can be applied to submerged bodies like the platform's base or the tunnel, taking Tp as the wave period. As to the speed drop factor ./@~,basing ourselves on the results of the experiments RC 1992 and RC 1993, we suggest for the platform's base: .~7~ = 1.75, for the small tunnel for the big tunnel
(Iz~l/e
(Izcl/R
= 5): ~
= 3):
= 1.75,
= 2.0.
As to the platform's columns the matter is somewhat more complex. Probably owing to the interaction between columns and surface waves, Cdo is not only due to the drop in the propagation speed, but also to a small variation of the amplitude of the pressure fluctuation. The . ~ proves to be nearly 1.75 so that according to (11.5) also Cdo should be nearly 1.75 (for a small _e, like in the case of the column, Cdo tends to coincide with . ~ ) . The increase in Cdo due to the variation in amplitude of the pressure fluctuation proved to be of about 10 + 15% in the experiment RC 1992. Thus we suggest to take columns:
Cdo = 2.
Finally, Ca~ is strictly correlated to Cdo, and we can take G~ =0.9(5,0 for both, the small tunnel and the big tunnel. Of course, we can achieve a precise estimate of the diffraction coefficient of any given structure if, like in the experiments RC 1992 and RC 1993, we work with the two gauge arrays. We advise doing this work for the design of a structure, since it enables a person to get a very clear idea on Cdo and C,~. Furthermore, for this special aim the technique of the small scale field experiment is easier than one may think. This, thanks to an interesting property of the spectra of the forceprocesses, we are going to illustrate. 11.4.5 Why the diffraction coefficients can be estimated rather easily through
The reader will r e m e m b e r that a big problem for the small scale field experiments is due to the swells. The case of fig. 4.12 was clear enough: wind waves with an excellent size for small scale models; a trifling presence of swells on the water surface; how this trifling presence was able to upset the spectra of the pressure head waves beneath the water surface. The conclusion was that this sea state could not be taken as a small scale model of a severe storm. The sea state of fig. 4.12 was recorded just during the experiment RC 1993. The
380
Chapter 11
spectra shown by the figure are the ones of the surface waves above the tunnel, and of the pressure head waves at points @, @ and @ [see fig. 11.6]. At the smaller depth (point @), the swell is already of the same order of magnitude as the wind wave; at point @ the swell overtakes the wind wave; at the larger depth (point @) the wind wave is very small with respect to the swell. Look now at fig. 11.15. This gives the spectra of the horizontal force Fo (t) and of the vertical force Fu (t). We should like to say: magic! All traces of swells have disappeared! Was it not for the small bump in the spectrum of Fo (t), one would think that there were no swells. Here below we explain this phenomenon. The sketch of fig. 11.16 shows the pressure fluctuation at two points of the yaxis (parallel to the wave direction) at the depth of the cylinder centre. Two cases are performed: (a) a wind wave; (b) a swell with a period three times larger than the
1.0
L FORCE
0.5
Io.831 1
o
T[s]
, I , I ,
0.0 0.0
,co[rad/s]
2.0
4.0
6.(
1.0
VERTICAL FORCE
0.5
~.
0 2 4
T[s]
6
0.0
0.0
i_.o [tad/s]
4.0
6.0
2.0
Fig. 11.15 Spectrum and autocovariance of the force on the horizontal cylinder. The spectra of the pressure head waves on the cylinder were given in fig. 4.12. The swell peak, which was the highest in the spectrum of the pressure head waves, here has practically disappeared! Why? The answer, in the two following figures.
381
wind wave's. W e a s s u m e the a m p l i t u d e of the pressure fluctuation to be the s a m e for the wind wave and for the swell. H o w e v e r , we see the largest p r e s s u r e difference (APmax) b e t w e e n the wave b e a t e n halfcylinder and the s h e l t e r e d halfcylinder proves to be m a r k e d l y larger in the wind wave. T h e r e are two reasons for this. First, u n d e r the same At, a t h r e e times smaller wave p e r i o d implies a t h r e e times larger APmax ; then t h e r e is the fact that At of the wind wave is t h r e e times larger than A t of the swell (since the swell is t h r e e times faster t h a n the wind wave), and hence we get a Apmax of the wind wave which is nine times larger t h a n the /kPmax of the swell. (This r e a s o n i n g is s o m e w h a t simplified, it b e c o m e s exact if is small and the w a t e r is deep.) Conclusion: the force is
R/L
Fo
Fo(t)Fcos(wt)+~Fcos
w h e r e the first t e r m on the r.h.s, is due to the wind wave and the second t e r m is due to the swell. This force has a s p e c t r u m with a p e a k of 1 F 2 on the f r e q u e n c y w of 2
wave direction
(b) I swell ]
A
max. pressure differenee between point A and point B
Fig. 11.16 Even if the pressure fluctuations of the wind wave and of the swell have the same amplitude at the depth of the cylinder's centre, the difference [pressure on the wave beaten halfcylinder]  [pressure on the sheltered halfcylinder] is the greatest by far in the wind wave.
382
Chapter 11
the wind wave and a second peak of 1 1 F 2 on the frequency a~/3 of the swell. 81 2 Hence the swell's share of the standard deviation of the forceprocess is only 1 _ 1)/~/1_~ 1 ( ~ / 1 + 81 8~ which makes 0.6%, and consequently the alteration of Cdo due to the presence of the swell is really very small. Let us pass to the vertical force. Here, the incidence of the swell is even smaller. Indeed we see in fig. 11.15 the spectrum of F~ (t) to exhibit no trace of swells. The sketch of fig. 11.17 helps to realize why, under the same amplitude of the pressure fluctuation at the depth of the cylinder centre, the wind wave exerts a vertical force much greater than the swell. Indeed the figure shows that the pressure difference between the upper halfcylinder and the lower halfcylinder is markedly larger in the wind wave. This is a consequence of the fact that the attenuation of Ap is the larger, the smaller the wave period is. Conclusion: the forces are, in practice, affected only by the wind wave. Hence, it is not true that the sea state of fig. 4.12 with wind waves of 2 s superimposed on swells of 6 s is not at all suitable as a small scale model of a severe storm. On the contrary, it can be an excellent model, provided the target is the pressure forces rather than the pressures pure and simple. In practice this sea state can be used for getting graphs like the ones of figs. 11.1011 giving the wave force vs time, or for
I wind wave [
I swell I
..
"...
Fv wave crest I
t Fvwave trough
Fig. 11.17 Even if the pressure fluctuations of the wind wave and of the swell have the same amplitude at the depth of the cylinder's centre, the difference [pressure on the upper halfcylinder]  [pressure on the lower halfcylinder] is the greatest by far in the wind wave.
383
evaluating the diffraction coefficient. Thus the small scale field experiments gain a new point: finding pure wind waves of small size is not always necessary; for a few aims like the evaluation of Cdo and Cd~, even some "dirty" wind waves, like the ones of fig. 4.12, are suitable.
KE can be conveniently expressed also in terms of Hph (the height of the pressure head wave at the depth of the cylinder centre) provided this depth is always beneath the free surface. Indeed with the linear theory we have
Vmax
 g   ~  O . l  l k
g p h  H
yielding
KE = Hph
D
tanh (kd)
7c
This is an useful formula for evaluating Ke when we work in the field. Indeed, a simple pressure transducer suffices to measure the height Hp~. 11.5.2 Experimental evidence for the validity o f the ideal flow pattern H o w do we decide whether or not the flow can be regarded as ideal? Certainly, the flow at the equivalent water volume can be regarded as ideal. Thus, we should investigate whether or not the forces on the solid body are of the same kind as the forces on the equivalent water mass. W h e n a wave crest passes at the centre of a water cylinder, whether it is horizontal or vertical, the horizontal force is zero, while the vertical force has a m i n i m u m (here we are referring to a horizontal cylinder). W h e n a wave trough passes at the cylinder centre, the horizontal force is again zero, while the vertical force has a maximum. Therefore a simple criterion for realizing whether the forces
384
Chapter 11
on the solid cylinder are like the forces on the equivalent water cylinder is to check the phase angles between waves and horizontal forces and waves and vertical forces. Let us see an example. Fig. 11.18 shows the record of the individual wave with the largest KE (hE ~ 2.5) taken during the experiment RC 1993 (the surface wave was recorded above the cylinder axis). We see that under the highest wave crest, the horizontal force is zero while the vertical force has a local minimum. This suggests that there is no apparent alteration due to nonideal flow near the solid body. A good way to further examine the nature of the force on the solid body is to look at the distribution of the cresttotrough heights of the force process. Fig. 11.19 shows the probabilities of exceedance of the cresttotrough heights of the processes Fo(t) and Fo(t). (The figure was obtained from the whole set of data of the e x p e r i m e n t RC 1993.) The nearly perfect a g r e e m e n t b e t w e e n these two probabilities is a further proof that the wave force on the solid cylinder is of the same kind as the wave force on the equivalent water cylinder, so that the flow at the solid cylinder can be regarded as ideal. 11.5.3
Morison's equation
With the real flow pattern, the sectional wave force (inline force) on a rigid cylindrical m e m b e r is calculated by means of Morison's equation (Morison et al., 1950) which can be written in the form (Borgman, 1958): f(t) =
(11.8)
SURFACE
W A V E
t[s]
286
288
290
292
294
296
Fig. 11.18 Horizontal cylinder of the experiment RC 1993: first inspection of the flow characteristics for the wave with the largest KE(Ke~ 2.5). The full correspondence of wave crest  zero of the horizontal force  minimum of the vertical force reveals the typical features of the ideal flow. Note that the greatest sea state KE (cf. Burrows et al., 1997) of the experiment was of about 0.8.
385
(11.9)
and where Vsect , asect are respectively the velocity vector and the acceleration vector n o r m a l to the pipe. W e allow the cylindrical m e m b e r to be o r i e n t e d at r a n d o m because the frame structural elements also have different orientations, as we shall see in the w o r k e d example of sect. 12.2. M o r i s o n ' s e q u a t i o n is thus the sum of two terms, the first one r e p r e s e n t i n g the inertia force, i.e. the force acting on the equivalent water mass multiplied by the factor C~, (inertia coefficient) that is generally greater than 1. The second term in M o r i s o n ' s e q u a t i o n represents the drag force that is the same kind of force exerted by a steady current. Besides the inline force there is a lift (transverse) force which is related to vortex shedding. F o r a vertical cylinder, the lift force is irregular even with the periodic waves, the quotient f u n d a m e n t a l lift f r e q u e n c y / w a v e frequency generally
10 4
a 2
10 3
~'" 0.82
102
,< 10_]
I 2
I 3
I 4
I 5
I 6
i 7
i 8
Fig. 11.19 Horizontal cylinder of the experiment RC 1993: a new test on the flow characteristics. The probability of exceedance of the cresttotrough heights of the force process is practically the same for the ideal water cylinder and for the solid cylinder. It is a further evidence that the flow in that experiment could be regarded as ideal.
386
Chapter 11
grows with Ke (Williamson, 1985 and Justesen, 1989), and the amplitude is usually expressed in the form
f lift max  
CtiftpR Vmax 2
where C~ilt is the lift coefficient. For a horizontal cylinder the lift force proves to be substantially in antiphase with the inerti